Prosecution and Racial Justice: Examining the Impacts of - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Slide 1

Prosecution and Racial Justice: Examining the Impacts of Prosecutorial Discretion

Presentation to the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys, September 2013

Slide 2 • October 16, 2013

Presentation Outline

• Introduction of the Vera Institute of Justice and the

Prosecution and Racial Justice Program (PRJ)

• Need for research and data on prosecution
• PRJ mission, model, and methodology
• Examples
• Discussion

Slide 3 • October 16, 2013

The Vera Institute of Justice

The Vera Institute of Justice combines expertise in research, demonstration projects, and technical assistance to help leaders in government and civil society improve the systems people rely on for justice and safety. Vera is an independent, nonpartisan, nonprofit center for justice policy and practice, with offices in New York City, Washington, DC, New Orleans and Los Angeles. Our projects and reform initiatives, typically conducted in partnership with local, state, or national officials, are located across the United States and around the world.

3

Slide 4 • October 16, 2013

Racial Justice: A Growing Concern Among Criminal Justice Stakeholders

Slide 5 • October 16, 2013

Need for Research and Data

Lack of data to support prosecutors’ efforts to achieve racial fairness Unavailability of data on prosecution, generally Limited access to prosecutorial files Sensitivity of data Disconnect between researchers and prosecutors

Slide 6 • October 16, 2013

An Innovative Approach:

The Prosecution and Racial Justice Program

Slide 7 • October 16, 2013

PRJ Mission

PRJ promotes racial fairness by:

• 1. Partnering with prosecutors to analyze the

impact of their decisions and develop policies to address unwarranted racial and ethnic disparities;

• 2. Serving as a resource for research, technical

assistance, innovation, and policy development in the areas of prosecution and racial justice; and

• 3. Engaging communities in improving

prosecutorial accountability and enhancing public safety.

Slide 8 • October 16, 2013

PRJ Mission

PRJ promotes racial fairness by:

• 1. Partnering with prosecutors to analyze the

impact of their decisions and develop policies to address unwarranted racial and ethnic disparities;

• 2. Serving as a resource for research, technical

assistance, innovation, and policy development in the areas of prosecution and racial justice; and

• 3. Engaging communities in improving

prosecutorial accountability and enhancing public safety.

Slide 9 • October 16, 2013

PRJ Methodology

We work collaboratively with prosecutors to: Analyze data about the exercise and impacts of prosecutorial discretion; Assist in developing routine policies and practices that promote fairness, efficiency and professionalism in prosecution; and Provide technical assistance to help prosecutors implement those measures.

Slide 10 • October 16, 2013

Our Partner Sites

• Mecklenburg County, NC
• San Diego, CA
• Milwaukee, WI
• New York County, NY

We will announce two new sites in the near future.

Slide 11 • October 16, 2013

Partnership Model: Phase 1

• 1. Identify

Partner

• 2. Build

Partnerships

• 3. Study

Partner and Jurisdiction

• 4. Collect

Data

• 5. Review

and Analyze Data

11

Slide 12 • October 16, 2013

Partnership Model: Phase 2

6.Draft Report 7.Revise Draft 8.Submit the Report 9.Discuss Findings

• 10. Develop

Policy Recommend ations 12

Slide 13 • October 16, 2013

Partnership Model: Phase 3

11.Provide Technical Assistance 12.Evaluate Outcomes

13

Slide 14

PRJ Methodology: Examples

Slide 15 • October 16, 2013

PRJ Methodology

Look at various discretion points Analyze specific offense categories Use multivariate statistical techniques

Slide 16 • October 16, 2013

New York County District Attorney’s Office

Slide 17 • October 16, 2013

Manhattan: Research Project Overview

Funding : National Institute of Justice; $390K; Jan 2012 – Aug 2013 Solicitation: “Building and Enhancing Criminal Justice Research- Practitioner Partnership” Nature of partnership: placement of two researchers at DANY Objective: to examine the impact of defendants’ race on:

1. Case acceptance 2. Pretrial detention 3. Case dismissal 4. Reduced charge offers and custodial sentence offers 5. Sentencing outcomes

Hypotheses: informed by previous research and PRJ’s work Data sources: admin data, ADA interviews, and case file reviews

Slide 18 • October 16, 2013

Population Data (all cases)

222,542 cases disposed of in 2010-2011 Gender: 83% Male Age: average = 34 years old All misdemeanors and a selection of felonies Excluded defendants under 16 years of age

31,716 Whites 103,892 Blacks 74,625 Latinos 9,111 Asians 371 Other

Slide 19

Slide 20

Percentage Detained

Comparing White, Black, Asian and Latino Defendants

Slide 21

Regression Predicting Detention After Arraignment

Controlling for Charge Seriousness, Number of Charges, Number of Counts, Age, Gender, Prior Arrest, Prior Prison Sentence, and Defense Counsel Type

Slide 22

Percentage of Case Dismissals

Comparing White, Black, Asian and Latino Defendants

Slide 23

Regression Predicting Case Dismissals

Controlling for: Charge Seriousness, Number of Charges, Number of Counts, Age, Gender, Prior Arrest, Prior Prison Sentence, and Defense Counsel Type

Slide 24

Percentage of Custodial Offers

Comparing White, Black, Asian and Latino Defendants

Slide 25

Regression Predicting Custodial Offer

Controlling for charge seriousness, number of charges, number of counts, age, gender, prior arrest, prior prison sentence and defense counsel type

Slide 26

Percentage of Custodial Sentences Imposed

Comparing White, Black, Asian and Latino Defendants

Slide 27

Regression Predicting Custodial Sentence

Controlling for Charge Seriousness, Number of Charges, Number of Counts, Age, Gender, Prior Arrest, Prior Prison Sentence, Arrest Neighborhood and Defense Counsel Type

Slide 28 • October 16, 2013

Mecklenburg County, NC

Slide 29 • October 16, 2013

Mecklenburg County, NC

• Goal: to develop office processes to identify and address racial

disparities in the exercise of prosecutorial discretion. To reach that goal, PRJ and MCDA worked together to:

• design data analysis protocols that would track prosecutorial

decision-making outcomes and identify patterns of disparity at key discretionary points;

• help MCDA integrate these analysis protocols into its management

process;

• develop and implement policies and strategies focusing on racial

fairness; and

• communicate the district attorney’s efforts to other chief prosecutors

interested in learning how to promote racial justice within their

• ffices.

Slide 30 • October 16, 2013

Mecklenburg County, NC

Focused on drug cases Upgraded management of drug case data from paper files to MekStat Initial statistical findings led to a more rigorous initial screening process for drug cases, resulting in a greater than 10-percent decrease in prosecutions and a corresponding decrease in dismissals later in the process. New procedures allowed prosecutors to identify weak cases at the beginning of the process, saving resources for more meritorious cases.

Slide 31 • October 16, 2013

Milwaukee, WI

Slide 32 • October 16, 2013

Analysis Plan

All closed cases between January 2009 & June 2010 Two discretion points

• Initial screening (case issued versus rejected)
• Plea offers (custodial versus non-custodial plea offers)

Race – “white” compared to “black” defendants Analyzed nine broad offense categories

• Person, property, drug, admin./public order, etc.

Examined specific offense categories

• Differences were found in 3 case categories: resisting and
• bstructing, prostitution and domestic violence

Slide 33 • October 16, 2013

Initial Screening Findings: Domestic Violence

10,455 defendants with domestic violence (DV) cases 91% of DV cases were intra-racial

67% black D & black V (N=7,056) 24% white D & white V (N=2,549) 7% black D & white V (N=717) 1% white D & black V (N=133)

Slide 34 • October 16, 2013

Initial Screening Findings: Domestic Violence

20% 27% 17% 26% 23% 31% 27% 28% 27% 35% 38% 34%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Overall Non-MPD MPD White D/Black V White D/White V Black D/Black V Black D/ White V

Slide 35 • October 16, 2013

Initial Screening Findings: Domestic Violence

20% 27% 17% 26% 23% 31% 27% 28% 27% 35% 38% 34%

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Overall Non-MPD MPD White D/Black V White D/White V Black D/Black V Black D/ White V

Slide 36 • October 16, 2013

Initial Screening Findings: Domestic Violence

There was no significant difference in prosecution by D’s race Cases involving a black V were less likely to be prosecuted than cases involving a white V Cases were most likely to be prosecuted when the D was black and V was white, compared to cases with a white D and black V, which were least likely to be prosecuted.

Slide 37 • October 16, 2013

Domestic Violence, Next Steps

Training and policy development Enlisting expertise of:

• Vera
• National experts
• Victim advocates
• Service providers
• Prosecutors
• Local law enforcement

Slide 38 • October 16, 2013

Closing Comments

• We believe that the intersection of prosecutorial

discretion and racial justice is an increasing concern among prosecutors and their constituencies

• Effective approaches to ensuring ethical, fair, and

professional prosecution require research and data

• Because PRJ is innovative, we are refining our

mission, model, and methodology

• We look forward to serving as a resource to diverse

jurisdictions across the nation

Slide 39 • October 16, 2013

Discussion

Slide 40 • October 16, 2013

Contact Information:

Whitney Tymas Director, Prosecution and Racial Justice Program 233 Broadway, 12th Floor New York, New York 10279 wtymas@vera.org