NCJ Number
106310
Date Published
1987
Length
82 pages
Annotation
This study examined the accuracy of activities and judgments that are intended to identify and target prosecutorial resources on serious, high rate offenders at two sites: the Los Angeles Career Criminal Division, which operates under fairly rigid and restrictive selection rules; and Middlesex County, Mass., which uses more discretionary selection guidelines.
Abstract
Despite wide differences in the selection criteria and procedures, the defendants actually targeted for priority prosecution were remarkably similar across the sites. In their judgments, prosecutors considered both the offender's rate of offending and perceived dangerousness. Los Angeles attorneys were found to have consistent, justifiable grounds for selection based on State law and office policy, although the predictive accuracy of these criteria were questionable. Middlesex attorneys did not have a clear picture of criteria for selection. An examination of offender records identified 27 indicators of high-rate, dangerous offending, of which a combination of 5 was most useful in targeting this group. 14 tables and 67 references.
Date Published: January 1, 1987
Downloads
Related Datasets
Similar Publications
- Cumulative Disadvantage: Examining Racial and Ethnic Disparity in Prosecution and Sentencing
- Criminal Justice Interventions for Offenders With Mental Illness: Evaluation of Mental Health Courts in Bronx and Brooklyn, New York, Executive Summary
- Federal Witness Security Program - Continuities and Discontinuities in Identity and Life Style