Racial and ethnic disparity in pretrial criminal processing

This study uses data on the processing of felony defendants in large urban courts to analyze racial and ethnic disparities in pretrial processing. There are three major findings. First, racial disparity is most notable during the decision to deny bail and for defendants charged with violent crimes. Second, ethnic disparity is most notable during the decision to grant a non‐financial release and for defendants charged with drug crimes. Third, when there is disparity in the treatment of Black and Latino defendants with similar legal characteristics, Latinos always receive the less beneficial decisions. These findings are consistent with the theoretical perspective offered, which suggests that stereotypes influence criminal processing when their specific content is made salient by either the concerns relevant to a particular processing decision or the crime type of a defendant’s primary charge.     

Drug use and pretrial misconduct in New York city

Is recent drug use significantly associated with pretrial misconduct? Does consideration of recent drug use enhance risk classification among a sample of persons who have time free pending the disposition of their cases? Using data on arrestees in Manhattan, this paper examines these issues and some related questions. To measure recent drug use, urine samples were collected from persons shortly after their arrest and tested for four drugs: heroin, cocaine, PCP, and methadone. Two measures of pretrial misconduct are considered: whether a defendant fails to appear for a scheduled court date (FTA) and whether a defendant is rearrested prior to case disposition. Censored probit models are used to estimate the statistical association between drug test results and pretrial misconduct. Results show that drug test results are significantly associated with pretrial misconduct over and above the information typically available to judges at the time release decisions are made. Some implications of these findings for pretrial decision making are discussed.     

The biasing impact of pretrial publicity on juror judgments

This study examines three previously unexplored aspects of the biasing impact of pretrial publicity. First, this study tests the differential effects of several different types of pretrial publicity on juror decision making. Second, this study explores the impact the presentation of trial evidence has on biases created by pretrial publicity. Finally, the study explores the psychological processes by which pretrial publicity effects may operate. Results indicate that pretrial publicity, particularly negative information about the defendant's character, can influence subjects' initial judgments about a defendant's guilt. This bias is weakened, but not eliminated by the presentation of trial evidence. Character pretrial publicity, and both weak and strong inadmissible statements appear to operate by changing subjects' initial judgments of the defendant's guilt. This initial judgment then affects the way subjects assess the evidence presented in the trial and the attributions they make about the defendant. Prior record pretrial publicity appears to have its effects by influencing subjects' inferences about the criminality of the defendant and this is related to posttrial judgments.     

A survival model of pretrial failure

This paper examines the likelihood of rearrest during the pretrial period with a model that depends on both time elapsed since release and on individual and case characteristics. Using data on a sample of male arrestees released on recognizance in the District of Columbia in 1984, we apply a survival or hazard model to the problem of predicting pretrial rearrest. We are particularly interested in whether drug use, as measured by urinalysis at arrest, is predictive of pretrial rearrest and its timing. Results show, for example, that drug use or a charge for larceny is associated with high risk levels in the period immediately following release. In our data, the number of prior convictions exerts a strong effect on rearrest risk throughout the pretrial period, but the initial high risk associated with being on probation or parole or having pending charges decreases rapidly over the course of a year at risk.     

论被告人庭前供述的证据能力

被告人翻供是我国刑事司法实践的一大难题,由于被告人庭前供述缺乏证据能力规则的约束,法官普遍以被告人庭前供述定案,这是导致我国冤假错案的一项重要原因。为此,有必要建立完善的被告人庭前供述的证据能力规则。国外在被告人庭前供述准入制度的设置上,存在传闻例外模式与直接言词模式;在庭前供述排除制度的设置上,存在正当程序模式与任意性模式。我国宜借鉴直接言词模式与任意性模式,在庭前供述与当庭供述一致时,庭前供述不具备证据能力;在庭前供述与当庭供述不一致时,庭前供述如果具备自愿性要件可以作为弹劾证据,只有同时具备自愿性与真实性要件时才可作为实质证据。     

The influence of pretrial exposure to community outrage and victim hardship on guilt judgments

Although the courts have explicitly expressed concerns about the effects of public sentiment on juries in highly publicized cases, no research has isolated the degree to which jurors’ exposure to community outrage and/or prospective social interactions in the community independently influence judgments of guilt. In the current research, jury eligible undergraduates were randomly assigned to conditions in a 2 (negative defendant facts pretrial publicity (PTP): present vs. absent)?×?2 (community outrage PTP: present vs. absent)?×?2 (anticipated social interaction: present vs. absent) between subjects factorial design. In an online session, participants read articles containing PTP (or not), and two days later they arrived at the lab to serve as mock jurors in a murder case – before the trial they were instructed (or not) that they would interact with people from the community in which the case was taking place. Neither PTP containing extra-evidentiary facts about the defendant nor prospective interaction with the community had main or interactive effects on guilt measures; however, mock jurors rated the defendant as more likely to be guilty when they read information about community outrage and hardships on victims. These findings suggest future avenues of PTP research focusing on community outrage and victim impacts.     

A Meta-Analytic Review of Pretrial Research: Risk Assessment,Bond Type,and Interventions

This study makes an attempt to aggregate what we currently know about pretrial decision making and jurisdictions’ responses to the pretrial population. This meta-analysis began with an exhaustive search for pretrial research which may have revealed the most prominent finding—that being a distinct lack of research that utilizes any amount of methodological rigor. The findings of this meta-analysis hold several policy implications for the field of pretrial research and practice. First, future research studies in the field of pretrial need to focus on methodological quality and rigor. Second, it appears that some conditions of release may be related to a defendant’s likelihood of failure to appear. Third, it appears that none of the conditions of release reviewed in this study are related to a defendant’s likelihood of re-arrest while on pretrial release. Finally, it is recommended that the field of pretrial develop a sound research agenda and execute that plan with rigor, transparency, and an approach that favors the continued cumulation of knowledge. Strong conclusions about the impact of pretrial release conditions cannot be made as the quality of the pretrial research, overall, is weak at best.     

The Effect of Pretrial Detention on Sentencing in Two Federal Districts

While a substantial body of research indicates that legal variables, such as offense severity and criminal history, principally shape sentencing decisions, other studies demonstrate that extralegal factors such as race, gender, and age influence sentencing outcomes, as well. The handful of studies focusing upon the effect of pretrial detention/release on sentencing outcomes indicate that pretrial detention is associated with greater lengths of incarceration. This study—the first to empirically examine the sentencing consequences of pretrial detention in the United States federal courts—employed a sample of 1,723 cases from two district courts (New Jersey and Pennsylvania Eastern). Pretrial detention and, to a lesser degree, revocation of granted pretrial supervision were associated with increased prison sentences; on the other hand, successfully completing a term of pretrial services supervision was associated with shorter sentence length. Implications for the federal criminal justice system are discussed.     

Bail decision making and pretrial detention

Bail practices became the target of reform efforts during the 1960's and 1970's not only because of issues concerning economic bias against indigent defendants but also because of criticism of the bail decision itself. Questions were raised about the appropriate uses of bail (e.g., to prevent flight or pretrial crime, or to inflict pretrial punishment), the rationality of the criteria relied on by judges in deciding bail, and the discretionary allocation of pretrial detention through high cash bail. In this article, case law and statutes governing bail practices in the United States are reviewed first to characterize the ambiguous legal framework from within which bail judges must operate. Then bail decisions in a large urban jurisdiction are analyzed as a case study to discover the factors most influential in determining pretrial release options. It is inferred that, even after years of reform, community-ties measures do not play a major role in the bail decision or the determination of pretrial custody; rather, the nature of the charged offense appears most influential. A finding of special significance is that a large proportion of these decisions could not be explained systematically (i.e., a large share of variance remained unexplained). The article concludes by suggesting a guidelines approach to bail that could narrow disparity in bail options and the use of detention, enhance the rationality of the decision process and contribute to more equitable pretrial practices.Revised version of a paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Toronto, August, 1978. This research was supported, in part, by a grant from the Statistics Division of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration to the Criminal Justice Research Center. Points of view or opinions stated are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position of policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.     

A simulation model of pretrial felony case processing: A queuing system analysis

Case processing tends to be examined with data analysis or evaluation designs. Both limit our understanding of how case processing as a whole operates and how its parts relate to each other. This article suggests queue simulation modeling as a method for dealing with these issues. We report here the initial development and analysis of a queuing model of arraignment to trial assignment. Conceptualizing on the basis of court functions and empirical findings, rather than institutional structures, we conceive a five-stage pretrial process. Using case-level, rather than system-level data, we construct a single-server, multiphase queuing model and use the model to simulate the behavior of a pretrial case processing system. Simulations show the strong impact of the final phase (trial assignment) on the entire system and that most of this impact is delay rather than service. The system is then analyzed using a factorial design that systematically alters model parameters thought to be important determinants of performance. Simulations are run for each possibility in the design, and analysis of variance is used to examine results. Analysis confirms prior results concerning final phase impact and points specifically to the import of phase capacity and exit rate. The utility of modeling is considered by suggesting some policy implications of the results for judicial staffing and behavior.     

Criminal justice decision making as a stratification process: The role of race and stratification resources in pretrial release

Our purpose is to bridge the criminal justice and stratification research literatures and to pursue the argument that homologous structural principles stratify allocation processes across central institutions of American society. The principle observed here in the making of bail decisions, as in earlier studies of the allocation of earnings, is that stratification resources operate to the greater advantage of whites than blacks. The operation of this principle is established through the estimation of covariance structure models of pretrial release decisions affecting 5660 defendants in 10 federal courts. Education and income are treated in this study as observed components of a composite construct, stratification resources, which works to the greater advantage of whites. Prior record is also found to operate to the greater advantage of whites. Two further variables, dangerousness and community ties, increase bail severity among blacks and whites. While the effect of community ties has been legally legitimized since the Bail Reform Act of 1966, the effect of dangerousness was not so legitimized until the Bail Reform Act of 1984. However, because our data precede the latter act, they confirm that this act simply reinstitutionalized earlier practice. Meanwhile, our race-specific findings may explain why although this and earlier studies find negligible main effects of race on criminal justice outcomes, black Americans nonetheless perceive more criminal injustice than do whites. In the criminal justice system, as in other spheres of American society, whites receive a better return on their resources, but our findings that the statutory severity of the offense and dangerousness work to the relative disadvantage of white defendants challenges conflict and labeling theory's one-dimensional characterization of black defendant disadvantage.     

Predicting pretrial misconduct with drug tests of arrestees: Evidence from eight settings

Identifying defendants at high risk of pretrial misconduct is a major problem for the judiciary. Currently, some have argued that testing arrestees for recent drug use is one way to distinguish between those who will and those who will not commit pretrial misconduct. The research reported here questions whether the incremental predictive power resulting from drug testing always improves predictions of pretrial misconduct. Using survival analysis to study time until rearrest and a probit model to analyze the occurrence of a failure to appear, we show that urine test results have no consistent power to predict pretrial misconduct after accounting for defendant's criminal records, community ties, and other factors commonly known by the court. These results are based on our analysis of eight data sets from different locales, time periods, and age groups.     

行政诉讼审前程序的功能定位及实现机制

国外主要法治国家行政诉讼审前程序,旨在实现的功能并非是单一的,除具有为庭审作充分准备,导向一个高效益的庭审之功能外,尚具有一定的或极强的实质性处理行政诉讼案件功能;我国现行法律对行政诉讼审前程序的功能定位是单一的,没有考虑行政诉讼的特质,致使该程序不具有真正意义上的独立程序之品性;我国行政诉讼审前程序应具有对未来庭审之裁判结果产生实质影响的功能;针对行政诉讼审前程序之应然功能的具体诉求,应建构其实现的具体机制：确立行政诉讼审前程序的称谓、确立行政诉讼审前程序的主持机构和配备人员、举行预审听证会。     

Exploring the consequences of prolonged pretrial incarceration: evidence from a local jurisdiction in the Philippines

Prolonged pretrial incarceration is a key issue facing the criminal justice systems of many developing countries. Detainees stay in jail for years while undergoing trial but are still unconvicted. However, little is known about the consequences of this troubling phenomenon. Informed by relevant prison and criminological theories, this paper analyses jail official data and qualitative interviews from detainees in a local jurisdiction in the Philippines to understand the magnitude and consequences of prolonged pretrial incarceration. Results suggest the emergence of a legally cynical view of the criminal justice system shared by the detainees. These sentiments likely serve as bases for popular opinions that justify use of violence and vigilante justice on offender populations. Implications on judicial and penal reforms in the Philippines are discussed.     

The effect of race and gender on bail outcomes: A test of an interactive model

This paper responds to suggestions that researchers interested in the relationship between defendant race, defendant gender, and criminal justice outcomes broaden their focus to include pretrial decision making. We used data on defendants charged with violent felonies in Detroit Recorder’s Court to analyze the effect of race and gender on the amount of bail imposed by the judge and on the defendant’s pretrial status. We found that judges take gender, but not race, into account in determining the amount of bail for certain types of cases; more specifically, Black females faced lower bail than Black males in less serious cases. In contrast, we found that both race and gender affected the likelihood of pretrial release. White defendants were more likely than black defendants to be released pending trial and females were more likely than males to be released prior to trial. In fact, white females, white males, and black females all were more likely than black males to be released. An earlier version of this mansucript was presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Phoenix, AZ, October, 1993.     

He Versus She: A Gender-Specific Analysis of Legal and Extralegal Effects on Pretrial Release for Felony Defendants

The current study sought to identify significant predictors of pretrial processing for both male and female defendants in an aggregate sample. The data used in this study were taken from the State Court Processing Statistics, 1990–2000: Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2004 Bureau of Justice Statistics . ( 2004 ). State court processing statistics, 1990–2000: Felony defendants in large urban counties [ Computer file ]. Ann Arbor , MI : Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research . [Google Scholar]). The original sample included a total of 87,437 felony cases. The relationships between relevant independent variables and 5 separate dependent variables (denial of bail, non-financial release, amount of bail set, making bail, and pretrial incarceration) were analyzed using both multivariate regression and Z-score comparisons within gender-specific models. Findings suggest that the effects of certain independent variables on pretrial release decisions and outcomes are different between the gender-specific models.     

Conditional cost shifting and the incidence of trial: pretrial bargaining in the face of a Rule 68 offer

Under Rule 68, a defendant may submit a pretrial offer of judgmentto the plaintiff. If the plaintiff refuses this offer and laterreceives a smaller award at trial, the defendant's court costssubsequent to the offer are shifted to the plaintiff. We analyzeRule 68 in a game theoretic setting in which trials may resultfrom an informational asymmetry: the defendant is the informedparty, and bargaining may take place after the defendant submitsan offer of judgment to the plaintiff. Rule 68 may encouragesettlement through this offer of judgment by prompting partialrevelation of privately held information.     

论民事诉讼审前准备程序的重构

在我国的民事诉讼中,虽然也有审前的准备程序,但从立法和司法的现状来看,该程序存在着严重的功能缺陷,起不到证据整理,争点固定和促成和解的功能。改革审前准备程序应当以公正和效率为价值取向,在诉讼模式的选择上采辩论主义与职权进行主义相结合的模式,审前准备程序的改革不能搞一刀切,在第一审程序中,对不同的案件,应当设计不同的审前准备程序供法院选择适用,对于简单的案件,作必要准备后及时开庭,对于复杂的案件,通常应作充分的审前准备。     

论全程同步录音录像代替笔录固定口供

录音录像资料与传统的文字笔录都属于犯罪嫌疑人的供述和辩解,系被告人的庭前陈述,但前者可以使庭前陈述具有证据可采性,在翻供的情况下还可以转化为证明讯问过程合法的视听资料。当前检察机关在讯问职务犯罪嫌疑人时对口供的记录方式,采取以笔录为主以录音录像资料为辅的并用模式．这种并用模式在实践中不仅造成了司法资源的浪费,也干扰了正常的讯问工作,应采用单独使用录音录像固定口供的模式。