sign in sign up
<<
Home , Murder, Murder (California), Murder (Cuban Law)

U.S. Department of Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics

Murder in Large Urban COllnties, 1988

By John M. Dawson, sample surve>' of and county prose­ convicted of ; overall, 73% were BJS Statistician, cutors' records. The survey covered convicted of some charge. and Barbara Boland disposed charges against nearly 10,000 murder , whose murder cases • Among those convicted of murder, 95% About 81n 10 murder victims were killed accounted for over 8,000 victims. received a of Incarceration or by relatives or acquaintances In murder : 74% were sentenced to a prison cases disposed ;n the Nation's 75 most Other findings from the survey Include: term, 18% to a life sentence, 2% to a OPUIOUS counties during 1988. Strangers death sentence, and 2% to probation. • illed about 2 In 10 of the victims. These • Among those arrested for murder and findings are drawn from a representative presented for pr~secution, 63% were

1 diverted 8 acquitted 3 sentenced to or 3 r Incarcera!lon 01 roferred other 1 year or less P 42 1\ trials ~34foundguilty 100 murder 81 73 convJc"d 65 sentenced to brought t ,...... carried ...... olsome ...... Incarceration of - S ". by the police for forward more than 1 year prosecution 39 , I ..., ,1/ , disposed 8 7 by guilty rejected dismissed plea 5 sentenced at -In " to probation or screening court other contiltlons

May 1993 This special report provides a detailed populous counties In the crAse - all elements necessary for a analysis of murderers, their victims, the - about half of those arrested for thorough ana.lysl\i of prosecution and circumstances in which they come In murder and just under half of those sentencing. contact with one another, and the justice murdered throughout the Nation that system's handling of those arrested for year. This s'ludy was possible as a result this most serious crime. It is an impor­ of the cooperation extended by the tant contribution to our understanding The study provides statistics to portray and their staffs In the of murder. The study sample of cases the victim-offender relationship, the Nation's largest counties. On behalf was drawn to represent nearly 10,000 demographic characteristics of both of BJS, I want 'co express my sincere murder defendants and more than 8,000 victim and offender, the type of weapon appreciation. murder victims In 1988 In the 75 most used, the circumstances surrounding Lawrence A. Greenfeld the , and the outcome of the Acting Director ------, ---~ • Circumstances Involving Illegal drugs Murder charges ranged In penalty severity Males accounted for about 75% of the accounted for 18% of the defendants frord first-degree (premeditated) to second­ murder victims and 90% of the murder and 16% of the victims. degree (not premeditated) to third-degree, defendants. In some places called voluntary or • Three-quarters of murder defendants and non negligent (intentional The percentage of both black victims - less than half of murder victims (44%) had killing without but In a state of 54% of all murder victims - and black been arrested or convicted In the past. In passion Induced by extreme ). defendants - 62% of all murder • 83% of the Cases with a victim who had A fuller definition of murder I~ given In defendants - was several times larger been arrested In the past, the "Termlnology" In Meii)odologyon page 10. than the percentage of black residents In also had a prior . the general population In these large urban During 1988 prosecutors and courts in the counties (20%). The percentages of white • Handguns were the most frequent means 75 largest counties disposed of murder victims (44%) and white defendants (36%) of murder, having been used against 55% cases involving an estimated 9,576 were lower than the percentage of white of black victims, 44% of white victims, 54% defendants and 8,063 victims. residents (77%). of male victims, and 36% of female victims. Victim and defendant characteristics While 48% of the general population were between ages 15 and 45, 75% of victims • Female murder victims were about 4 Victims and defendants differed from the and 91 % of defendants were in that age times more likely than male victims (17% general population range. The percentages of victims and versus 4%) to have died from strangulation defendants in their twenties were twice or from injuries caused by a personal Overali, in 1988 both murder defendants that found in the general population (19%). object used as a weapon. and their victims were more likely to be By contrast, persons age 55 or older male, were more likely to be black or comprised 22% of the general population, Hispanic, and were younger than the but 8% of tile victims and 3% of the • A spouse, romantic partner, or lover murdered more than 3 In 10 of the female general population In the 75 largest defendants. victims but 1 in 10 of the male victims. counties (table 1).

• In all age categories of victims, over a Table 1. Characteristics of murder Victims, murder defendants, third of the killers were in their twenties. and the ganeral population In the 75 largest counties, 1988

• Gang members comprised 7% of 75 largest Characteristic counties Victims Defendants defendants. A third of the victims of these defendants also belonged to a gang. Sex Male 48% 78% 90% Introduction Female 52 22 10

This study chose 33 counties to represent Race the 75 largest U.S. counties. These 75 Wh~e 77% 44% 36% counties, out of the Nation's 3,100 total, Black 20 54 62 Other 3 2 2 accounted for 37% of the U.S. population but 63% of the 22,680 murders reported Ethnlclty to the police and 52% of all murder Hispanic 10% 20% 19% during 1988.' Data were Non-Hispanic 90 80 81 collected from the prosecutors' files for oases involving murder charges; only Age cases that had been adjudicated during Under 5 7% 4% 0%, 1988 were selected. For details see "Data 5-9 6 1 ' 10-14 7 2 ' collectlon" in Methodology. 15-19 8 11 16 20-24 9 18 24 , Sentences in State Courts, 1988, p.5. BJS 25-29 10 18 20 Bulletin, NCJ-126923. December 1990. 30-34 8 11 13 35-44 13 17 18 45-54 10 10 6 550rover 22 8 3

Meanage 34 years 29 years 32 years Median age 28 26 28

'Based on fgwer than 10 sample cases. -Less than 0,5%.

2 Murder vIctims and defendants In about half of the cases, victims and their Reason lor Peroentolvictlms had numerous sImilarItIes killers shared a reason for being on the belngatlhe Percent with en offender scene or were engaged In the same type ",m.=,;ur.,::;de:;,:.r.=,;sc=-=e:..:;ne:----,o;,:..fv:.;,:lc;,:;;tlm"-"s:.... who shared reason .Whlle differing from the larger population, of activity Just before the murder. A third of All 100% 48% many murder victims and defendants all murder victims died at home, and about Home 31 14 shared some characteristics. Both victims half of those were killed by someone with Reoreatlon 20 13 and defendants were often male, black, whom they were living. Otherlegltlmate 29 11 and between ages 15 and 45. Most Drugs 10 7 Dispute 6 1 murder victims had faced a single assailant Vlolenoe 1 alone: 9 of 10 victims were the sole murder victims, and 2 of 3 defendants were the sole defendants (table 2). Table 2. Victims and defendants In murder cases In the 75 largest counties, 1988 When compared within the same case, a Number Victims Defendants large percentage of victims and defendants Incase Number Percent Number Percent had characteristics In common (table 3). Overall, 74% of all defendants had a victim All 8,063 100% 9,576 100% of the same sex. Both victims and their 1 7,401 92 6,440 67 murderers were usually male; 81% of all 2 530 6 1,802 19 defendants were male and had a male 3 96 1 902 9 4 8 290 3 victim. One in ten female murder victims 5 28 84 1 was killed by a woman. 6 0 58

Murder victims and those who killed them Nole: Detail may not sum to 100% because 01 rounding. were also likely to be of the same race or - Less than .5%. ethniclty. Almost all black victims (94%) and three-fourths of white victims (76%) were killed by someone of the same race. Over 80% of all white or black murder Table 3. Characteristics of victims and defendants within the same case, 1988 defendants In the 75 counties had a victim of the same racial background- Percent of Defendants Who shared Vlolimswho shared • Race of Percent of victims a characteristic with a charaoterlstlo with delendant Total White Black Other one or more victims one or more delendants

White 100% 89% 9% 2% Same sex 74% 73% Black 100 18 81 1 Other 100 36 2 62 Male 81 91 Female 21 10

Among those cases for which criminal Sameraco 84% 85% history Information was available for the defendant, about half (56%) had a victim Whke 89 76 Blaok 81 94 who also had a history of arrest or convic­ Other 62 48 tion (whether for felony or mlsdemeanor).2 About 83% of victims who had an arrest Sameethnlclty !l0% 90% record were killed by someone with a Hispanlo 75 78 criminal history. Non-Hispanic 94 93 2Crlmlnal history Inlormatlon was available on three­ quarters of delendants and on a thIrd of victims. Gang membership 60% 97%

Member 31 84 Not member 93 97

Criminal history 60% 60%

Had 56 83 Not have 72 42

Numberof persons 6B% 80%

One 97 84 Multiple 8 32

Note: In muUlple-defendant or multlple-vlotim cases, If at lea!>t one person shared a characterlstlo with at least one person on the other side of the vlctim-delendant pair, the charaoterlstlo was oonsldered to be mutual. For example, In multiple-defendant cases, a victim murdered by a gang member means at least one defendant was a gang member. In muttlple-vlctlm cases, murder of a gang member means at least one of the victims was a gang member. The murder cases Involved an estimated 9,576 defendants and 8,063 victims. This • disparity In numbers arises from cases having a single victim and several delendants or a single delendant and several victims, or other combinations.

3 1m

In age, victims and murderers did differ somewhat.3 While often both victims and Table4. Age of murder victims and defendants In the 75 largest counties, 1988 killers were young, 36% of the victims but Percent of victims 44% of the defendants were In their Ageof In cases Involvng aUeast twenties (table 1). In every age category victim ..-:.A.:::."_...:.0:.:.;n.::.ed:.:e:.:.:IEl::;n=da:::.n~ta::.;gc::.e:::20:..;-2:.:9,-. __~ ______..• __.~_ .. among victims, a third or more of the All 100% 46% victims had a killer between ages 20 and • 120runder 5 46 29 (table 4). 13-19 12 38 20-29 38 59 GUns and knives inflicted the injuries 3D-59 39 35 60orover 6 44 in 80% of the murders

Male victims (54%) were more likely than female victims (36%) to have died from a gunshot wound (table 5). Compared to 4% Table 5. Sex and race of murder Victims, by weapon or methods of death In the 75 largest counties, 1988 of male victims, 17% of the female victims died from strangulation or Injuries Inflicted Percent 01 victims by a killer wielding a personal weapon, Weapon Sex Race Whije such as a fist. or method All Male Female __ Black _~_'_' ____'_'_'_'_"""" Total 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% While half of all victims were murdered with Guns a handgun, blacks (55%) more often than Handgun 50 54 36 44 55 whites (44%) were handgun victims. Shotgun 5 5 4 4 5 Whites more often than blacks were Rnle 4 4 4 4 4 Knlle 21 21 19 21 22 victims of the use of a blunt Instrument. Blunt Instrument 5 5 7 8 4 Personal weapon 5 3 9 6 4 Strangulation 3 1 8 3 2 Victim-offender relationships Vehicle 2 2 3 3 1 and murder circumstances Fire 2 1 3 2 OIl18r 3 4 7 7 1

Most murder victims and their killers Nota: 'Other" Includes asphyxiation, , throwing Irom height, neglect. had social ties scalding, and use 01 machine gun. --Less than 1%. About 80% of murder victims and their killers were not strangers but were • acquainted with or related to each other Table 6. Relationships of murder victims to their killer In the 75 largest counties, 1988 (table 6). (See Methodology for coding of the circumstances and the victim/killer Percent 01 victims Sex Race relationshlp.4) Half of the victims had a Relatlonshit;! All Male Female Wl1~. Black~ ___._"~_ ... _•. _ social or romantic relationship with the murderer. Sixteen percent of the victims Family member 16% 120/. 31% 15% 17% Spouse 6 4 16 6 7 were related to the killer. About 12% of Child 3 3 6 3 4 victims were Involved with the killer in a Nonlamilial drug relationship, while 5% of victims were relationship 52% 52% 490/. 46% 52% involved with their killer In some type of Casual acquaintance 28 30 21 25 30 criminal enterprise other than drugs. Friend 12 13 8 13 11 Romantic partner 9 7 18 8 10

How the victims were related to their killers Stranger 20% 21% 16% 26% 15% varied by sex and race. A third of temale Felony victim 5 5 6 8 3 victims (34%) were killed by their spouse Drug user/buyer 12% 14% 4% 9% 14% or romantic partner. By contrast, 11 % of Collaborator In a males were killed by their spouse or criminal enterprise romantic partner. Males more often than other than drugs 5% 5% 3% 6% 4% females were assailed by a friend, casual 3% acquaintance, drug associate, or stranger. Other 4% 3% 4% 4% Relationship not known 5% 5% 2% 4% 4% 3 Age was availablet for nearly all defendants (98%) In the survey but only 16% of victims. 4Percentages that combine relallonship categories were Note: The number In a cell equals percent 01 victims of that race or sex who had that particular relationship computed from the raw survey data. If computed by wHh the killer. In some cases more than one type of relationship was lound; hence, an Individual may be summing percentages w~hin table 6, the result may be counted In more than one cell of the table. Percents may add to more than 100% in some columns 01 the too large because individuals who had muUlpie table. Most detail relationship categories that account lor lewer than 10% 01 victims are not shown In the table. relationships with their killers were counted more than Individuals counted In detail categories are also counted In the summary categories. once In the lable.

4 -----_._------

Whites were more likely than blacks to Table7. CIrcumstances surroundIng murders In the 75 largest countIes, 1988 have been killed by a stranger or someone committing another felony. Blacks more Percent of victims Sex Race • often than whites were victimized by a Clrcumstance_ All Male Female White Black casual acquaintance or a drug associate. "'------Criminal activity 22% 25% 13% 200/. 24% Drugs 11 12 6 8 13 44% of aI/ victims died during Other than drugs 12 13 7 12 12 a personal conflict Felony-murder 16% 14% 21% 20% 12% 12 12 14 15 9 Personal conflict was followed by criminal Sexual 2 6 2 1 1 2 1 1 activity (a quarter of the cases) as the 1 2 1 1 most frequent type of circumstance Personal conflict 44% 41% 52% 42% 45% Involving victims and their killers at the time Properly dispute 16 20 14 14 22 of the murder (table 7). Premeditated Love/sex dispute 19 14 39 19 20 Domestic Issues 17 12 34 14 19 murder accounted for 4% of murders. Redress of Insult 10 12 6 10 10 On-going 3 4 1 3 4 As in the case of relationships, the Dispute at the scene 6 7 1 7 5 circumstances generally differed between Other acliVIW 16% 16% 14% 16% 15% male and female victims (table 7).5 Half of Act of rela lation 5 6 2 4 5 3 2 5 3 3 female victims, compared to a fifth of male Premed~ated 4 4 4 4 3 victims, died during commission of another felony or as a result of conflict over Circumstances not known 5% 5% 4% 5% 3% romantic or domestic Issues. The Note: See note on lable 6. of 35% of men and 21% of women -·Less than 0.5%. involved illegitimate activities, disputes, or drugs. Table 8. Typology of relatIonshIps and cIrcumstances In murder cases White and black victims differed In regard In the 75 largest counties, 1988 to the circumstances of the murder. White Generaltype SpecUlc Specific victims more often than black victims died relationship! Percental kinds of kinds of during . Blacks more often than circumstance Victims Defendants relationships' circumstances' • whites were victims in circumstances Male and female Spouse Romantic triangle associated with illegitimate business or Involvement 22% 16% Common-law spouse Lover (heterosexual) Lover/spous~ ql.!'1rrel drugs. Lover (homosexual) Rebuff sex advance Lover (cohabltan\) Sex assault Col/ateral categorized 30% Ex-lover or ex-spouse Prostftution Boyfriend or glrUriend of murder victims and 50% of murder Rival defendants Illegal drugs 16% 18% User/buyer Drug manufacture Partner Dlsputeoverdrugs Murder circumstances and the relation­ Rival Steal drugs/money ships between victims and offenders can Employer/employee Drug scam Co-worker Baddeal be used to create a typology for murder Interloper Punish drug Iheft (table 8). When the typology Is limited to Illegal recreation circumstances and relationships of a Crime other Crlminalsyndlcate Applicable to defendants only similar nature (and thereby applies to only than drugs 13% 30% Gang member Felony murder some victims and offenders), the combined Prost~utelplmp Contracl killing Prostftute/cllent Premed~ated killing category of sexual or romantically intimate Applicable to victims only relationships and circum­ Reverse felony stances Included 22% of victims and 16% Auto of defendants. Drug relationships and Sex offense circumstances together accounted for Mafia about the same percentage of victims Gangland (16%) and defendants (18%). Crime other Chlldvlctim 4% 3% Child or stepchild ChUdabuse than drugs accounted for 13% of victims, of killer versus 30% of defendants. Gangs 4% 6% Gang member Gangland 5Percentages that combine circumstance categories Juvenile gang Gang fight were computed from the raw survey data rather than by Turf gang summing percentages In table 7. See footnote 4• Drive-by shooting Note: An individual could be counted under a general category In this table based either on the relationship or the circumstance findings In the case. Individuals whose relationships and circumstances do not come within any of the above types are not included In this table. 'Exact wording used by the survey data coders. See "Coding of circumstances and victim/killer relationships" • In Methodology. The percents are based on individuals rathen than eventsj the number of defendants exceeded the number of victims.

5 - Outcomes of murder cases: Most persons who were arrested years In prison (table 11). Among those Convictions and sentences for murder and then conVicted were convicted of murder, another 18% were sentenced to prison sl::lntenced to life in prison, 2% to death, Bin 10 arrests for murder resulted and 3% to Jail or probation. in a murder convict/on Among murder defendants convicted either of murder or of a less serious charge, • Among those cases disposed in 1988, three-fourths were sentenced to a term of • 28% of murder defendants were convicted of their most serious arrest charge and 35% were convicted of a less serious Table 9. Case outcomes for defendants arrested for murder charge. When a person arrested In the 75 largest counties, 1988 for murder Is convicted of another offense, Percent of outcomes the difference between arrest and Most Percent of convictions serious Second Vol un- Other conviction charge reflects Information murder Number of Any First degreel taryman- than obtained following arrf'st, prosecutorlal £I1!r~ defendants Total None char~~_ ...2.!!:!9L._s!!!!9hte!:.... ~. decisions about the , decisions by grand , and the final All 9,576 100% 270/0 73% 19% 22% 22% 100/. determination of guilt or Innocence by First-degree Judge or . Ten percent of murder murder 7,038 100 30 70 25 20 17 8 arrests led to a conviction charge other Second-degree than murder or homicide (table 9). or other murder 2,318 100 18 82 34 33 15 Voluntary or Murder cases with a potential punishment nonnegligent of death had tile highest convict/on rate manslaughter 220 100 26 74 46 28

'See "Terminology" In Methodology section for definition of murder. In capital offense cases - those with a "Not applicable because a person cannot be convicted of an offense not charged. murder charge which could result In a death penalty - more than 99% of the defendants were convicted of some charge, compared with 70% of defendants Table 10. Whether a dafendantwas charged with a oapltal offense, bycaseoutcome In the 75 largest counties, 1988 In murder cases with noncapital charges (table 10). State law determines who can Percunt of defendants charged be sentenced to death. Often the law Numberof Not Sentenced to prison defendants Total convicted Term Life Death Jail Probation Other requires a finding that the aggravating All 9,576 100% 27% 54% 11% 1% 1% 3% 3% • factors present In a case - for example, premeditation, mUltiple victims, or the Capital offense 804 100 31 51 12 o 5 killing of a or a kidnap victim - outweigh the mitigating factors to Noncapltal Impose the death penalty.6 Half of the offense 8,n2 100 30 58 8 3 2 defendants with a charge Note: if a defendant's case had more than one outcome, the outcome tabulated was the most serioUS. A sentence to life not counted as a prison term. A sentence to a prison term and probation was counted received a life sentence, and an eighth only as a prison term. were sentenced to death. -Less than 0.5%. "Not applicable. Outcomes nf murder cases generally differed from those in felony cases

Murder defendants in 1988 were more Table 11. Convict/on offense of persons arrested for murder, by sentence received In the 75 largest counties, 1938 likely than felony defendants overall in the 75 largest counties to be convicted of Most some charge (73% compared to 54%), serious Percent of convicted defendants conviction Sentenced to erlson although murder defendants were less offense Total Term Life Death Jail Probation Other likely to plead gullty.7 Murder defendants' cases were less likely to be disposed by All 100% 74% 16% 1% 2% 3% 4% means other than trial or guilty plea- Murder 100 74 18 2 2 3 19% compared to 45%. (See box on case First degree 100 50 40 6 4 tracking, page 7.) Other murder 100 79 16 0 2 3 6 See 1988. BJS Bulletln, NCJ- Voluntaryl 118313, July 1989, for a discussion of aggravating and nonnegllgent mitigating circumstances in death sentences. mal1slaugher 100 90 0 5 4 7See Table 13 in Felony Defendants In Large Urban Counties, 1988, BJS Bulletin, NCJ-122385, April 1990. Other then murder 100 74 2 0 7 10 7 Note: See table 10 note on how the survey team coded sentences. -Less than 0.5%.

6 Tracking defendants' cases from the Less likely to be·,- More likely to- start of prosecution - rejected by the at Initial - go to trial, rather than be disposed The routes that murder defendants' case screening by guilty plea cases followed through the criminal - diverted to some non-prosecutorlal - result In a trial Justice system to disposition In 1988 disposition - end In a conviction on some charge were not typical of felony defendants' - referred for prosecution of another - lead to a sentencr;l of Incarceration cases generally. Compared to felony charge rather than probation defendants generally, murder - dismissed by the court. - and, if sentenced to Incarceration, defendants· cases were- to be sentenced to more than 1 year.

All felony arrests, 1988

6 diverted 1 acquitted or 18 sentenced 10 referred Incarceration of 100 3 7 2found 1 year or less felony 1 guilty • arresls 55 54 convlcled 14 sentenced to brought carried J of some Incarceration of 7 by the forward crime more than 1year police for 52 prose- -1 J disposed 22 sentenced cution 18 21 C by guilty to probation or rejected dismissed plea other conditions at In screening court

Murder arrests or fndlctments In large urban counties, 1988

1 diverted 8 acquitted 3 sentenced to or 3' referred other Incarceration of 100 42 34lound 1year or less murder 1 7 guilty arrests l' 81 65 sentenced to brought . carried 73 convicted ~ {t~) J of some Incarceration of by the forward 39 crime more than 1year pOlice for disposed prose- J 5 sentenced 8 1 by guilty cution 7 to probation or rejected dismissed plea other conditions at in screening court

"The dotted line indicates that these cases left the some of the case flies were not available for use Source for all felony arrests: Prosecution of Fe/ony process at an undetermined stage. "Other" Includes In the survey; Implications of this are discussed Arrests, 1988, BJS Special Report, NCJ-130914, murder defendants who died or whose individual in "Nonavallabllity of cases" in Methodology. February 1992. cases had not been disP'lsed. In some counties

•

7 For those convicted of first-degree murder, convicted of first-degree murder was 28 of a criminal history did not, however, the percentage sentenced to life was years, while the mean sentence for measurably Increase the likelihood of a higher than Tor all convicted murder non negligent manslaughter was 7 years. death sentence. defendants comblned- 40% versus 16%. First-degree murder convictions accounted Personal characteristics and case Among defendants convIcted of murder, for all of the death sentences: 6% of those outcomes the case outcomes for men and women convicted of first-degree murder were were measurably different • sentenced to death. Three-quarters of murder defendants had a history of crimInal arrests or convIctions While 74% of male defendants and 62% Murderers sentenced to prison receIved for or of female defendants were convicted of an average sentence of 14 years at least some charge, the differences The absence or presence of a criminal between conviction rates for white and This mean prison sentence of 14 years history was an Important factor In black defendants were not statistically was nearly 3 times the mean prison sentencing for those charged with murder. significant (table 14). Black and white sentence of murder defendants convicted A higher percentage of defendants with a defendants had about the same type of of some other crime (5 years) (table 12). criminal history received a life sentence case outcome and average prison The more serious the murder conviction (table 13). By contrast, murder defendants sentence length. Both racial groups were charge, the longer the average prison without a criminal history were more likely equally likely to have received a death term. The melln sentence for defendants to receive a term of years. The existence sentence.

Table 12. A verage prison term of Tabie 13. Effect of prior criminal history on sentences In the 75 largest counties, 1988 defendants sentenced to prison In the 75 largest counties, 1988 Prior Percent of defendants criminal Sentenced to erlson Most serious Number of years hlstor:l Total Term Life Death _~.fl:QP_atlon Other conviction sentenced to erlson offense Mean Median All convicted defendants 100% 74% 16% 1% 2% 3% 4% All 14 11 Defendants convicted First degree 28 26 ofmurdar Other murder 18 15 Voluntary or Yes 100 74 18 2 2 3 nonnegifgent No 100 80 9 1 5 4 manslaughter 7 7 Defendants convicted Other than murder 5 4 of other than murder Yes 100 77 3 5 10 5 Note: CalCUlation of the median (lJut not the No 100 70 1 11 9 9 mean) Included thoso defendants sentenced to life or to death. Defendants charged with capital offense

Yes 100 31 50 13 0 1 5 !lIo 100 39 40 14 0 3 3

Note: See table 10 note on the coding of sentences. "Criminal history" means any record of prior arrest or conviction. "Not applicable to nonmurder convictions. -Less ihan 0.5%.

•

8 Among murder defendants 55% of the Characterlsllc Life sentences accounted for 51 % of the men and 44% of the women were of capital murder Tolal men charged with a capital murder, but sentenced to a term of years In prison. defendant eligible 42% of the women. Thirteen percent of • None of the sampled defendants receiving All 804 the men were sentenced to death. No the death sentence was female. No statistical differences existed between statistically measurable differences In Sex blacks and whites In sentencing outcomes sentencing outcomes existed between Male 770 In capital cases. white and black murder defendants. Female 34 Race Male defendants, whether convicted of Male defendants In capital cases were murder or of offenses other than murder, more likely than females to receive either a White 406 on average were sentenced to a longer Black 379 life or a death sentence, based on the prison term than female defendants. Half following estimated number of persons the men had a sentence of 17 years or eligible: less for murder, but half the women had received 8 years or less (table 15). There were no statistically measurable dlffer- Table 14. Outcomes of murder cases, by sex and race of defEmdants ences between average prison terms for In the 75 largest counties, '1988 black and white defendants. Percent of murderdefendanls Characteristic Not Sentenced to erlson of defendant Total convicted Term Life Death Jail Probation Other Table 15. Avorage prison term for defendants convIcted of murder, Murdercases by sex and race

All 100% 27% 54% 11% 1% 1% 3% 3% Most serious convlotlon Number of ~ears Sex offense Mean Median

Mafe 100% 26% 55% 120/0 1% 1% 20/0 3% An 14 11 Female 100 38 44 6 0 2 7 3 Murder 16 13 Olherthan Race murder 5 4

White 100% 25% 560/0 10% 2% 2% 2% 3% Sex Black 100 29 52 12 ,,'I 1 2 3 Other 100 21 65 6 0 0 4 4 Male Cases at All 15 12 capital murder Murder 16 14 • Other than All 100% 310/0 510/0 12% 00/. 10/0 5% murder 5 4 Sex Female

Male 100% 0% 30% 510/0 13% 00/. 1% 4% All 9 6 Female 100 7 35 42 0 0 0 15 Murder 11 7 Olherthan Race murder 4 3 Rac" White 100% 1% 320/0 44% 16% 00/. 1% 7% Black 100 0 27 60 10 0 1 3 Whll'l 14 12 Nole: See table 10 note on the coding of sentences. All Murder 15 13 -Less than .5%. Otherthan murder 7 5

Black

All 14 11 Murder 16 12 Otherthan murder 4 4 •

9 I

Methodology or more defendants must have been The case weights had to be adjusted I charged with murder, and (b) the matter to compensate for the loss of the Terminology must have been adjudicated during 1988. nonparticipating county. I In accordance with the survey plan, all IIMurder" Includes (1) Intentionally causing cases meeting the Inclusion criteria were Statistically weighted, the 3,119 defen- the death of another person without to be used In this study If the total was 200 dants In the sample cases represented extreme provocation or legal justification, or less, otherwise a random sample of 200 9,576 murder defendants In the nation's • (2) causing the death of another while was chosen. Only 6 of the 33 counties had 75 largest counties. The 2,655 victims committing or attempting to commit more than 200 murder cases. represented 8,063 victims In the 75 largest another crime, and (3) nonnegllgent or counties. . Murder excludes Virtually all cases meeting the 1988- negligent or Involuntary manslaughter, and disposition criterion were disposed for all Coding of circumstances and vlctlm- , which Is classified as defendants In the case. Of the more than offender relatIonships aggravated assault. Murder also Includes 3,100 defendants for whom data were to murder, aiding and abetting a obtained, only 13 had not yet had their Information about a murder case usually murder, and facilitating a murder. When cases adjudicated at the time of data Included details about the relationship the term "murder" Is used In this report collection In 1990. Another 25 defendants between the victim and the defendant and without qualifying terminology, It Includes had died of or other causes. about the circumstances that existed at the nonnegllgent manslaughter. See Crime time of the murder. The rules for de- Definitions and Classlflcatfon, BJS, July Nonavallabllity of cases scribing relationships and circumstances 1987. were those used by local police In reporting In 17 of the 33 counties In the study none murder CJses to the FBI. These rules The survey did not Include non murder of the sampled cases had been rejected were developed by the FBI for publication defendants nor any Whose most serious (declined for prosecution) by the of Its Supplemental Homicide Reports. charge was attempted murder, negligent prosecutor. In 9 of the 17 some of the The reporting rules Include a set of codes or Involuntary manslaughter, or vehicular sampled cases were not available for to de'3crlbe the victim/assailant homicide. analysis: relationship and the circumstances In 81n 8, the unavailable cases had flies that which they were Involved at the time the Defendant In this report refers to a person could not be located: murder occurred. In the survey reported arrested for murder and presented by the -I n 1, cases rejected by the prosecutor here, however, provision was made for police for prosecution. Killer, murderer, or could not be made available for stUl;:Iy coding as many as three kinds of assailant Is used rather than defendant In because of legal restrictions. relationships and three kinds of clrcum- analyses of data about victims. stances. For example, If the Victim was There Is no reason to believe that across the assailant's brother and was also the • Sample of counties all nine counties all of the unavailable assailant's drug supplier, both a family cases were rejections, but if they were, the relationship and a drug relationship would The 33 counties studied for this report overall rejection rate would have been be recorded. Likewise, more than one were a sample that represented the 75 12%, Instead of 8% as shown In Figure 1 type of circumstance might have existed at largest counties In the Nation. The ranking of this report. Some of the types of case the time of the murder. Some 79 separate of counties In which the 75 largest were outcomes would have had lower percent- relationship codes and 85 circumstance kfe!1t1f1ed was based on a combination of ages: The percentage of defendants tried codes were aVailable for codIng cases. crime data (1980 and 1984 Uniform Crime and convicted would have been 33% Report Part I arrests) and population data Instead of 34%; the percentage pleading Among all pairs of victims and assailants (1980 population from the Census guilty would have been 37% Instead of found In the prosecutor's murder flies, a Bureau's City County Data Book). The 39%; and the percentage receiving an majority required only a single relationship rankings correlated with the size of the Incarceration sentence of more than 1 year or circumstance code. The percentages of prosecutors' offices. The original sample would have been 62% Instead of 65%. cases requiring more are shown below: plan Identified 34 counties, 1 of which ultimately declined to participate. Percent of vicUm and ComputatIon of estimates assailant pairs wfth single from sample data or mUltiele coding of Data collection Number or Relat· Circum· Case weights were applied to statistics on codes used Ions hips ~ The murder data were collected from the the sampled cases to expand them to 2 8,4% 40.0% prosecutors' offices In the 33 sampled estimates for the universe of the 75 largest 30r more 0.3 8.6 counties. A total of 2,539 murder cases counties, the key assumption being that In the text of this report, any percentage were stUdied, which yielded data on 3,119 cases not sampled were similar to the that spans more than one category of defendants and 2,655 Victims. These cases sampled. A case weight was the relationship or circumstance was cases were a sample of about half of all Inverse of the probability that a case would those with a murder charge brought to the computed In such a way as to avoid be in the survey. That probability was the multlple·countlng. prosecutors In 1988, or earlier, and that product of the probability that a given were disposed during 1988. The criterion county would be chosen and the probability for Including a case on a roster from which of selection of that case In that county. • cases would be sampled was that (a) one

10 ClIII

Response rates that are submitted by local law enforce­ In general, If the difference between two ment agencies to State crlmlnallnforma­ numbers Is greater than twice the standard aThe case records Identified age, race, sex, tlon repositories. This 76% conviction rate error for that difference, we can say that ~nd ethnlclty for nearly all defendants found for OBTS Jurisdictions In 1988 Is not we are at least 95% confident that the two (approximately 98%). The same was true measurably different from the 79% referred numbers are In fact different; that Is, the of victims, except that victim age was to In the preceding paragraph. apparent difference Is not simply the result available only 16% of the time. of surveying a sample rather than the Conviction rates for murder cases flied In entire population. Similarly, If the Also obtained In nearly all cases were court are reported for a selectl01 of 10 difference between two numbers Is greater the relationships between victims and counties In table 2 In The Prosecution of than 1.6 standard errors, we are at least defendants and the circumstances Felony Arrests, 1988, BJS, NCJ-130914, 90% confident that the two numbers are preceding the murder, as well as the arrest February 1992. The local prosecutors In different. Except where explicitly Indicated or Indictment charge, and whether the those 10 cOllntles provldCld the data. The otherwise, all differences discussed In this defendant was convicted, aI'ld If so, the rates In those counties, among murder report had a confidence level at or above conviction offense. For Incarceration or cases disposed during 1988, ranged from 90%. When differences between two probation cases, the length of the term of 57% to 84%. Four of 10 had rates higher numbers were below the 90% confidence sentence was usually known. than the 79% reported here. level, the two numbers were described In the text as "not measurably dlfferent. 1I Defendant criminal history was available Number of murder convictions In three-quarters of the cases, but victim Typical reasons why a standard error may criminal history was obtained In only a third Table 9 shows 63% of murder defendants be farge relative to the difference whose of the cases. Gang membership could be convicted of murder, for a total of variability It measures Include: (1) the determined for 80% or more of defendants approximately 6,000 convictions. The measurements or observations being and victims. comparable number In the National .Judlclal compared (e.g. a sex difference In average Reporting Program (NJRP) for the 75 prison sentence length) Is highly variable Comparison with other BJS murder data largest counties In the United States during irom one case to another, and (2) a small collections 1988 Is approximately 5,000, which Is not sample size. measurably different than the 6,000 Selected data reported here can be estimate reported here. See table 2.1 a The following are the 33 counties whose compared with other BJS publications that In Nat/onal Judicial Reporting Program, prosecutors' offices participated In the .contaln Information on murder cases. 1988, NCJ-135945, December 1992. study reported here: However, the 63% of murder defendants ConvictIon rate who were convicted of murder Is higher Arizona Missouri than the comparable 46% reported by the Pima S1. Louis The 73% rate of conviction reported In NPRP. New table 9 Is significantly higher than the 66% Bernalillo reported for murder defendants In the Sentences to prison, Jail, or probation Orange National Pretrial Reporting Program Kern Kings (NPRP). See table 13 In Felony The NJRP and NPRP reports Include the San Diego Monroe Defendants In Large Urban CountIes, sentences received by those convicted of Riverside New York ~'988, BJS Bulletin, NCJ~122385, April murder, comparable to table 11 of this Colorado Queens 1990. The NPRP studied a sample of report. All three studies show that of such Denver Ohio felony cases obtained from court records defendants, more than 90% were Arapahoe Franklin in 40 of the 75 largest counties In the sentenced to a prison term, fewer than 5% Connecticut Montgomery Natlc-,I. Those cases were followed to were sentenced to Jail, and about 3% were New Haven Oklahoma disposition or for up to a maximum of 1 sentenced to probation without any Florida Oklahoma year. Incarceration. The OBTS progr8m, Dade PennsylvanIa however, reported these percentages a~ Orange Philadelphia The following two reports give data only 81 %, 11 % and 5% respectively. Table 11 Browarc! Allegheny for cases accepted by the prosecutor, shows 18% receiving a life sentence, while illinois Tennessee exclusive of rejected cases. If rejected NJRP showed 26%. Cook Shelby cases (see figure 1) were excluded In this Louisiana Texas report, the conviction rate would be 79%, Standard errors Orleans Dallas rather than the 73% presented in table 9. Tarrant Data collected in this murder study were Middlesex Travis The Offender-Based Transaction Statistics collected from a sample of 33 counties. Maryland Washington (OBTS) program reported a 76% In some counties, data were obtained from Prince Georges King conviction rate among murder cases that a sample and not from a complete Michigan were prosecuted In 14 States. See table 4 enumeration of murder cases. Because Wayne e In TrackIng Offenders, 1988, BJS Bulletin, counties and cases were sampled, a NCJ~129861, June 1991. The OBTS sampling error (standard error) Is program uses arrest reco~ds, disposition associated with each number In the report. information, and data from fingerprint cards

11 - ~' Estimates of 1 standard error for table 1 Estimates of 1 standard error for table 7

Characteristic __, lJ!otlms Defendants Sex of victim Raceofvlctlm Total Male Femaie Whne Black Sex -- Male 0.7% 0.6% Criminal activity 1.00/0 1.0% 1.00/. 0.8% 1.00/. Drugs 0.7 0.8 1.0 0.8 0.6 Race Other than drugs 0.9 1.0 1.0 1.2 1.2 White 2.8% 2.7% Black 3.0 2.9 Felony-murder 0.7% 0.6% 1.6% 1.3% 0.6% Other 0.3 0.3 Robbery 0.7 0.6 1.7 1.3 0.7 Sexual assault 0.2 0.6 0.4 0.3 Ethnlclty Burglary 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.3 0.2 Hispanic 2.3% 2.2% Arson 0.3 0.2 0.7 0.3 0.4

Age Personal conflict 1.3% 1.3% 2.00/. 1.6% 1.6% Under 12 years 0.6% 0.1% Property dispute 0.7 0.6 1.1 0.9 1.0 12t020 1.7 0.9 Love/sex dispute 0.9 0.7 1.9 0.9 1.4 20t030 2.4 0.8 Domestic Issues 0.7 0.4 1.6 0.6 1.1 30t060 1.9 1.0 Redress oflnsult 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.9 0.5 600rover 0.7 0.4 Other activity 0.9% 0.9% 1.5% 1.3% 1.0% !.verege age (yra) Act of retaliation 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.6 Child abuse 0.4 0.4 0.9 0.5 0.5 Mean 0.8% 0.2% Premednated violence 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.5 0.6

Estimates of 1 standard error for table 2 Estimates of 1 standard error for table 9

Number Victims Defendants T~ee of conviction outcome Incase Number Percent Number Percent Most Percent of conviction serious Second Volun- All 726 880 murder Number 01 Any First degreel taryman charge defendants charge del/ree other slaul/hter 689 0.7% 596 1.4% All 660 2.7% 1.6% 4.5% 1.4%

First degree murder 745 3.1 2.1 1.7 1. 'J- Second degreel other 467 3.0 1.6 1.9

Estimates of 1 standard error for table 6 Voluntary manslaughter 33 5.1 4.8 Sex of victim Raceofv!ctlm Total Male Female White Black "Not applicable because a person cannot be convicted 01 an offense not charged. Family member 0.8% 0.7% 2.2% 1.2% 1.0% Spouse 0.5 0.4 1.2 0.6 0.6 Child 0.5 0.4 1.1 0.5 0.6

Nonfamillal acquaintance 1.2% 1.$% 2.2% 1.6% 1.7% Casual Estimates of 1 standard error for figure 1 acquaintance 0.9 1.0 1.6 1.3 1.1 Friend 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.8 Outcome of murder arrest Partner In romance 0.5 0.5 1.3 0.6 0.6 Diverted or referred 0.2% Rejected at screening 2.2 Stranger 1.1% 1.3% 1.6% 1.5% 1.3% Dismissed In court 0.6 Felony victim 0.6 0.6 1.2 1.2 0.5 Disposed by gulUy plea 2.4 Trial acquittal 0.7 Drugs 0.7% 0.9% 0.9% 1.0% 0.90/. Found guilty 1.9 Sentenced tolncarceratlon of more than 1 year 0.7 •

12 Estimates of 1 standard error for table 11 Estimates of 1 standard error for text table page 9 Most serious Percent of defendants Charaoterlstlc Total conviction Sentenced to erlson of defendant eligible offense Term Life Death Jail Probation Other All 107 All 1.8% 1.6% 0.3% 0.3% 0.4% 0.4% Sex Murder Male 105 Female 9 First degree 4.2% 3.9% 1.0% 0.1% 0.2% 0.9% Other murder 3.1 3.2 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Race Voluntary/ White 67 nonnegllgent Black 57 manslaughter 1.4 0.3 0.0 0.5 1.0 O.S

Other than murder 2.8% 1.0% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.3% How to order the data set

Data utilized In this report are avail- able from tt- 1 National Archive of Estimates of 1 standard error for table 12 Criminal Justice Data at the University Average number of years of Michigan, P.O. Box 1248, Ann Most serious sentenced to erlson Arbor, MI 48106; toli free 1-800-999- conviction offense Mean Median 0960. The data set Is archived as All 0.5 0.4 Murder In Large Urban Counties, 1988 (ICPl)R 9907). The data are Murder available In either dBASE or SAS First degree 0.9 0.5 dataset form. Other murder 0.8 0.5 Voluntary nonnegllgent manslaughter 1.3 0.3 John Dawson, statistician for the Bureau of Justice Statistics, wrote this Other than murder 0.4 0.4 Special Report In collaboration with Barbara Boland, formerly of Abt Associates. Dawson monitored the Prosecution of Felony Arrests project, through which the report's data were Estimates of 1 standard error for table 14 collected, and Boland served as the Percent of murder defendants project's principal investigator. Chuacterlsllc Not Sentenced to [1r150n Steven K. Smith, Ph.D., supervised of defendant convicted Term Life Death Probation Other Jail the report. Patrick A. Langan, Ph.D., Murdercases provided statistical review. Lawrence A. Greenfeld provided helpful advice All 2.7% 2.8% 1.1% 0.2% 0.3% 0.3% 0.2% for revision of the original draft. Sex Tom Hester, assisted by Priscilla Middleton, edited the report. Chief Male 2.7% 2.8% 1.1 % 0.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.4% Female 3.2 3.7 1.4 0.0 0.6 1.1 0.7 of Publications Marilyn Marbrook, Priscilla Middleton, Yvonne , Race Jayne R. Pugh and Darrell Gilliard White 1.9% 2.4% 1.3% 1.8% 0.5% 0.4% 0.6% produced the report. Black 3.8 3.6 1.2 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 Other 5.3 5.9 2.7 0.2 0.2 0.4 0.4 Abt Associates personnel and their Cesesof project responsibilities were as ".lIpltalmurder follows: Barbara Boland (survey

All 0.2% 3.20/. 3.4~. 2.0% 0.0% 0.4% 1.9% design), Jan Chaiken (sampling plan), Wayne Logan (case classification Sex scheme and data form design), Lynn Male 0.0% 3.1% 3.4% 2.1% 0.00/. 0.4% 1.7% Warner (coordination of field Female 5.4 13.2 15.4 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.8 operations), Marcia Schleck and Mark Race Searight (field data collection), and Bill Martin (database design). Ronald White 0.5% 4.1% 4.1% 3.0% 0.0 %0.6% 2.8% Sones, consultant to Abt Associates, Black 0.0 4.0 4.9 2.7 0.0 0.6 2.0 did the original computer programming.

May 1993, NCJ-140614 13 ~-e ec e ureau 0 US ice ~ tatistics Publications on CD-ROM

The National Economic, Social, and Enviror.mental Data Bank (NESE-DB) CD-ROM, produced by the U.S. Department of Commerce, is a comprehensive electronic infor­ mation source focusing on the U.S. economy, society, and environment.

NESE-DB presents the full text of many of the Federal Government's most popular publications on CD-ROM, including The Economic Report of the President, Toxies in the Community, Health Statistics U.S., and Digest of Educational Statistics. The fol­ lowing publications from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (8JS) are also included:

• Criminal Victimization in the U.S., 1990 (text and tables) • Capital Punishment, 1990 (text) • Crime and the Nation's HousehoJri~i~ 1990 (text) • Drugs and Jail Inmates, 1989 (text) • Felony Sentences in State Courts, 1988 (text) • Female Victims of (text) '~ • Jaillnmates, 1990 {text} • Prisoners in 1990 (text) • Profile of Jail Inmates (text) • Probation and , 1990 (text) • School Crime (text) • Women in Prison (text)

The CD-ROM includes ASCII text, Lotus tables, and updated Browse software. It can be used on any IBM-compatible PC with at least 640K of memory, an ISO 9660 (standard) CD-ROM reader, and Microsoft CD-ROM extensions (version 2.0 or higher).

The NESE-DB CD-ROM can be purchased from the BJS Clearinghouse for $15. For more information, call1-BOO-732-3277.

To order your copy of the NESE-DB CD-ROM, please send a check or money order for $15 made out to the BJS Clearinghouse to P.O. Box 6000, 2B, Rockville, MD 20850. You may also purchase the CD-ROM by using VISA or MasterCard. Please include type of card, card number, card holder's name and address, and expiration date for procossing. Credit Card Type and Number ______Expiration Date ______Name and Address of Card Holder ------~~~~-

Bureau of Justice Statistics BJS technical reports Courts Law Enforcement Managemeht Now dIrections for NCS, NCJ·115571, 3189 reports Series crimes: Report of a field test, BJS bul!etlns and Administrative Statistics Felony senten cos In State courts, 1990, (Revised July 1993) NCJ·104615,4/87 LEMAS,1990: Data for Individual agenclos NCJ·140186.3I93 with 100 or more officers, NCJ·134436, 1toll-free 800-732-3277 to ord~' BJS Corrections Pretrial release of felony defendants, 1990, 9/92 NCJ·139560, 11/92 orts, to be added to one of the BJS BJS bulle tillS and special reports BJS bullellns and special reports • ailing lists, or to speak to a reference Prisoners In 1992, NCJ'141874, 5/93 Prosecutors In State courts, 1990, NCJ·134500, 3/92 Drug enforcement by police and sheriffs' CapItol punishment 1991, NCJ·136946, specialist In statistics at the Bureau of Pretrial release of felony defendants, 1988, dopartmonts,1990, NCJ·134505,5/92 Justice Statistics Clearinghouse, 10/92 State and local police departments, 1990, Drug enforcement and treatment In NCJ·127202,2/91 National Criminal Justice Reference Felony sentences In State courts, 1980, NCJ·133284,l2191 prisons, 1990, NCJ·134724, 7/92 Service, Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20850. NCJ·126923,12190 Sheriffs' departments,1990, NCJ·133283, Women In prison, NCJ·127991, 4/91 12191 For drugs and crime data, call the Drugs Violent State prlsonlnmatos and tholr Criminal for the poor, 1986, & Crime Data Center & Clearinghouse, NCJ·112919,9/80 Pollee departments In largo cities, 1987, victims, NCJ·124133, 7/90 NCJ·119220, 8/89 11;100 Research Blvd., Rockville, MD Prison rule violators, NCJ·120344, 12189 BJS special reports Profile of State and local law enforcement 2()850, toll-free 800·666-3332. Recidivism of prisoners released In 1983, Murder In large urban counties, 1988, agencies, 1987, NCJ·113949,3I69 NCJ·140614,3I93 BJS maintains these mailing lists: NCJ·116261,4/89 Drug use and crime: State prison Inmate RecidiVism of felons on probation, Drugs & crime • Law enforcement reports sur~oy, 1986, NCJ·111940, 7/88 1986·89, NCJ·134177, 2192 • Drugs and crime data Time served In prison and on paroie, 1984, Felon1 case processing In State courts, Drugs, crlmo, and the justice system: • Justice expenditure and employment NCJ-108544, 12187 1986, NCJ·121753, 2190 A notional report, NCJ·133652, 5/93 • National Crime Victimization Survey Profllo of State prIson Inmates, 1986, Felony defendants In large urban counties, Technical appendix, NCJ·139578, 6/93 • Corrections NCJ·109926,1/88 1990: National Pretrial Reporting Program, Catalog of selected Federal publications • Courts Imprisonment In four countries, NCJ·141872,5/93 on Illegal drug and abuse, • Prlvacy and security of criminal histories NCJ-l 03967, 2/87 National Judicial Reporting Program, 1988, NCJ·139562,8/93 Drugs and crime facts: and criminal Justice Information policy Survey of State prison Inmates, 1991, NCJ·135945, 1/93 NCJ·136949,5/93 The prosecution of felony arrests: lR92, NCJ·139561, 3/93 • Federal statistics 1991, NCJ·134371, 9/92 • BJS bulletins and special reports Prisoners at midyear 1992 (press release), 1988, NCJ-130914, 2192 NCJ·138541,10/92 1987, NCJ·124140, 9/90 State drug resources; 1992 rlatlonal • Sourcebook of Criminal Justice Correctional populations In the U.S.: Felons sentenced to probation In State directory, NCJ·13437S, 5/92 Statistics (annual) 1990, NCJ·134946. 7/92 courts,1986, NCJ·124944, 11/90 Federal drug data for national policy, NCJ-122715,4/90 Single copies of reports are free; use 1989, NCJ·130445, 10/91 Felony defendants In large urban counties, Census of Stata and Federal correctional 1988, NCJ·122385, 4/90 NCJ number to order. Postage and Federal justice statistics handling lire charged for bulk orders faCilities, 1990, NCJ-137003, 6192 Profile of felons convicted In Stale courts, Prisons and prisoners In the United States, 1986, NCJ-120021, 1/90 Federal criminal case processing, 1960·90, of single reports. For single caples of NCJ·137002,4/92 Felony laws of 50 States and the District of multiple titles, up to 10 titles are freej with preliminary data for 1991, Notional Corr'lctions Reporting Program: Columbia, 1986, NCJ-l05066, 2188, $14.60 NCJ'136945,9/92 11-40 titles $10; more than 40, $20; 1990, NCJ·141879, 5/93 State court model statistical dictionary: Comp9ndlum of Federaljuslice statistics: IIbrarfes call for special rates. 1989, NCJ-138:?22, 11192 Supplement, NCJ-98326, 9/85 1969, NCJ·134730, 5/92 1988, NCJ·134929, 4/92 1st edition, NCJ·62320, 9/80 1988, NCJ·130474, 1/92 Public-use tapes of BJS data sets State and Federallnstltullona, 1926·86: and other criminal Justice data are The Federal civil justice system (BJS Race of prisoners admitted, NCJ·125618, Privacy and security bullelln), NCJ·l04769, 8/87 avallal;>le from the National Archive 6/91 of Criminal Justice Data (formerly Historical statistics on prisoners, Crlmlnaljusilce Information policy: Federal offenses and offenders NCJ-l11098,6/88 Report of the National Task Force on CJAIN), P.O. Box 1248, Ann Arbor, MI Criminal History Rscord Disposition BJS spec/al reports 48106 (toll-free 800-999·0960). Federal sentencing In transition, 1986-90, Census of JailS and survey Reporting, NCJ·135836, 6/92 Attornsy General's program for Improving NCJ·134727,6/92 tlOnal Crime Victimization of Jail inmates the Nation's criminal history records: Immigration ollenses, NCJ·124546, 8/90 BJS bulletins and special reports BJS Implementation status report, Federal crimInal cases, 198()·87, rvey NCJ·118311,7/89 • Drunk driving: 1989 Survey of Inmates NCJ·134722,3/92 rlmlnal victimization In the U.S.: of Local Jails, NCJ-134728, 9/92 Identifying felons who to Drug law violators, 1980·86, NCJ·111763, 1991 (final), NCJ·139563, 1/93 Jail Inmates, 1991, NCJ-134726, 6/92 purchase firearms, NCJ·128131,3I91, 6/88 1973·90 trends, NCJ·139564, 1/93 Women In Jail, 1989, NCJ·134732, 3192 $9.90 Pretrial release and detention: The Bull 1990 (final), NCJ·134126, 2192 Drugs and jail Inmates, NCJ·130836, 8/91 Assessing completeness and accuracy of Reform Act of 1984, NCJ·l09929, 2188 Crime and older Americans Information Jail Inmates, 1990, NCJ·129756, 6191 criminal history record Information: package, NCJ·140091, 4/93, $15 Profile of jail Inmates, 1989, Audit guide, NCJ·133651, 2192 General Crime victimization In city, suburban, NCJ·129097,4/91 Forensic DNA analysis: Issues, BJS bulletins and specIal reports and rural aren, NCJ·135943, 6/92 NCJ·128567, :;;"~1 Jail Inmates, 1989, NCJ·123264, 6/90 Patterns of robbery and burglary School crime, NCJ·131645, 9/91 Population density In local jails, 1988, Statutes requiring use of criminal history Teenage victims, NC.J·128129, 5/91 In 9 States,1984'88, NCJ·137368, 11/92 NCJ·122299.3/90 record Information, NCJ·129896, 6/91 Female victims of violent crime, and ·related offenses Consus of local JailS, 1988, Survey of criminal history Information NCJ·126826,1/91 In 6 States, 1983·88, NCJ-132445, 1/92 NCJ·121101,2/90 systems, NCJ·125620, 3/91 BJS telephone contacts, '91, NCJ·130133, The Notion's two crime measures: Uniform Original records of entry, NCJ·125626, Crime Reports and the National Crime Census of local jails, 1988: 7/91 12/90 Tracking offenders, 1988, NCJ·129861, 6/91 Survey, NCJ·122705, 4/90 Summary and methodology, vol. I, Strategies for Improving data quality, International crime rates, NCJ·l10776, 5/88 Redesign of the National Crime Survey, NCJ·127992,3/91 NCJ·115339,5/89 NCJ·111457,3I89 Data for Individual jails In the Northeast, Public access to criminal history record Felony sentencing and Jail characteristics: Midwest, South, West, vols. II·V, The seasonality of crime victimization, Information, NCJ·111458, 11/88 A BJS discussion paper, NCJ·142523. 8/93 NCJ·lll033,6/88 NCJ·130759·130762.9/91 Juvenile records and record keeping Rethinking the criminal iustlce system: Victimization and fear of crime: World Census oflocdljalls, 1983: Selected systems, NCJ·112815, 11/88 Toward a new paradigm, A BJS·Prlnceton perspectives, NCJ·93872, 1/85, $9.15 findings, methodology, summary tables, Automated fingerprint Identlflca!!on Discussion Paper, NCJ·139670, 1/93 The National Crime Survey: Working papers, vol. V, NCJ·112795. 11/88 systems: Technology and policy Issues, BJS statistical programs, FY 1993, Vol. I, History, NCJ·75374, 8/82 NCJ·l04342, 4/87 NCJ·139373.1/93 Vol. II, Methodology, NCJ·90307, 12184 Probation and parole Criminal justice "hot" flies, NCJ·l01850, BJS national update: BJSbulletins BJS bulletins and special reports 12/86 Jan, '93, NCJ·139669, 12192 Criminal victimization 1991. NCJ·136947, Probation and parole: Expert witness manual, NCJ·77927, 9/81, Dcl. '92, NCJ-138540, 9/92 10/92 1990, NCJ-133285, 11/91 $11.5(:- July '92, NCJ·137059, 7/92 Crime and the Nation's households, 1990, 1989, NCJ·125633, 11190 April '92, NCJ·135722, 4/92 BJS/SEARCH conference proceedings: Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics, NCJ·136950, 7/92 Recidivism of young parolees, National conference on Improving the 1991, NCJ'137369, 9/92 The crime of , NCJ·96777, 3/85 NCJ·l 04916, 5/87 quality of crlmlnel history Information: State Justice sourcebook of statistics and Household burglary, NCJ·96021, 1/85 NCJ·133532,2192 Measuring crime, NCJ·75710, 2/81 research, NCJ·137991, 9/92 Juvenile corrections Criminal iustlce In the 1990's: The futUre Violent crime In the U.S., NCJ·127855, 3/91 of Information management, BJS special reports BJS data ret'ort, 1989, NCJ-121514, 1/91 Elderly vlctlm:s, NCJ·138330. 10/92 Children In custody: Census of public and NCJ·121697, 5/90, $7.70 private Juvenile detention, correctional, Publications of BJS, 1985·89: Handgun crime victims, NCJ·123559, 7/90 Juvenile and adult records: One system, Microfiche library, PR030014, 5/90, $190 Black victims, NCJ·122562 4/90 and shelter facmtles, 1975-85, NCJ·114065, one record? NCJ·114947, 1190 6189 Blbllographv, TB0030013, 5/90, $17.50 Hispanic victims, NCJ·1205J7, 1/90 Opon vs. confidential records, Publications of BJS, 1971·84: The redesigned National Crime Survey: Survey of youth In custody, 1987 (spacial NCJ·113560,1/08 report), NCJ-113365, 9/B6 Microfiche library, PR030012, 10/86, $203 Selected new data, NCJ·114746, 1/89 Compendium of State privacy anti security Blbllogr:lphy, TB030012, 10/86, $17.50 Motor vehicle theft, NCJ·l 09978,3/88 legislation: 1990 directory of automated criminal justice VIolent crime trends, NCJ·l07217, 11/87 Expenditure and employment 1992, NCJ·137058, 7/92 Information systems, Vol. 1, Corrections, Robbery vIctims, NCJ-l04638, 4/87 1992 full report (1, 500pp, microfiche $2, $10.60; 2, Courts, $11.50; 3, Law enforce· Iolent crIme by strangers and non· Justice expenditure snd employment: 1990 (BJS bulletin), NCJ·135777, 9/92 hard copy, $184), 7/92 ment, freo; 4, Prohstlon and parole, $11.50, strangers, NCJ·l03702, 1/87 5, Prosecution, $11.50; NCJ·122226-30, • Preventing domestic: vlolenr.e against 1988 (full report), NCJ·125619, 8/91 Extracts, 1984,'85, '86, NCJ·124139, 8/91 5/90 women, NCJ·102037, 8/86 Report to the Nation on crime and justice: Crime prevention measures, NCJ·l00438, Justice variable pass·through data, 1990: Antl·drug abuse formula grants (BJS Second edition, NCJ·l05506, 6/88 3186 Technical appendix, NCJ·112011, 8/88 The use of weapons In committing crimes, technical report). NCJ·133018, 3/92 See order form NCJ·99643, 1186 Reporting crImes to the police, on last page NCJ-99432, 12/85 *U.S. G.P.O.:1993-342-471:80004 ·' M .& • 2& Please put me on the mailing list for­ o Privacy and security of criminal o National Crime Victimization O Law enforcement reports-national history data and Information pollcy­ Survey-the only ongOing national data on State and local police and new legislation; maintaining and 'I,' survey of crime victimization sheriffs' departments, operations, releasing Intelligence and Investigative o Sourcebook of Criminal Justice • equipment, personnel, salaries, records; data quality issues Statistics (annual)-broad-based data spending, pOlicies, programs o BJS bulletins and special reports­ from 150 + sources with addresses; o Federal statistics-data describing timely reports of the most curreilt 400 + tables, figures, index, annotated Federal case processing, from justice data in all BJS data serier. bibliography investigation through prosecution, o Pro:;ecutlon and adjudication In o BJS National Update-a quarterly adjudication, and corrections State courts-case processing from summary of new BJS data, programs, o Drugs and crime-sentencing and prosecution through court disposition, and information services and products time served by drug offenders, drug State felony laws, felony sentencing, o Send me a signup form for NIJ Catalog, use at time of crime by jail inmates public defenders, pretrial reiease free 6 times a ya!lr, which abstracts and State prisoners, and other quality o Corrections reports-results of private and government criminal justice data on drugs, crime, and law sample surveys and censuses of jailS, publications enforcement prisons, parole, probation, and other o Justice expenditure & employment­ corrections data annual spending and staffing by Federal, State, and local governments and by function (police, courts, corrections, etc.)

To be added to any BJS Name: ______mailing list, please copy Title: ______or cut out this page~ fill Organization: ______in, fold, stamp, and mail to the Justice Statistics .Clearinghouse/NCJRS. Street or box: You will receive an annual renewal card. If you do not City, State, Zip: ______• return it, we must drop you Daytime phone number: -->-( _-'-)______from the mailing list. ----= Criminal justice interest: ______

To order copies of recent BJS reports, check here 0 Put your organization ______and circle items you want and title here if you to receive on other side used home address above: ------of this sheet.

u.s. Department of Justice Official Business BULK RATE Office of Justice Programs Penalty for Private Use $300 POSTAGE & FEES PAID Bureau of Justice Statistics DOJ/BJS Permit No. G·91

Washington, D.C. 20531

Special • Report