1. Kristyn A. Jones; Therese L. Todd; and Preeti Chauhan, PhD
Understanding Prosecutorial Discretion: An Examination of Drug Charge Consistency in New York City
Kristyn A. Jones; Therese L. Todd; and Preeti Chauhan, PhD x
METHOD
RESULTS PREDICTING CHARGE REDUCTION
RESULTS & DISCUSSION
INTRODUCTION
Prosecutors wield a great deal of power and have enormous discretion on whether to prosecute, negotiate a plea, and recommend a sentence. However, there is relatively little research on how prosecutors use this discreteion.1
One important prosecutorial discretionary point is whether an initial arrest charge receives a reduction, stays the same, or increases at disposition.2
Research shows that prosecutorial discretion is affected by both legal (e.g., case specific) and extra-legal (e.g., defendant) characteristics.3
However, most studies have focused on one jurisdiction (i.e., one prosecutor), limiting generalizability of results.4
Drug charges provide an interesting context to study prosecutorial discretion, given the large number of drug arrests, changing laws and changing public opinions regarding drug use.5
We examined the association between top arrest charge and top disposition charge in New York City using data from Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS). The dataset included all fingerprintable arrests in New York State from 1980 to It also included demographic, geographic, and case characteristics. We focused on felony charges, given that approximately 70% of these arrests resulted in a reduced charge. Further, we focused on New York City because it removes variability in varying policing policies but includes five separate district attorneys.
*This report is made possible by data provided by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) as well as generous funding provided by Arnold Ventures. The opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not those of DCJS or Arnold Ventures. Neither New York State nor DCJS assumes liability for its contents or use thereof.
Sample: Our sample consisted of 741,890 felony arrests between 1990 and For the purposes of these analyses, we focused our attention on top arrest drug charge and examined whether the top charge stayed the same or was reduced at disposition charge.
Dependent variable: Our dependent variable is whether the charge was reduced in severity from arrest to disposition (coded as the dummy variable).
Predictor variables:
Defendant characteristics: Race, Age, and Gender
Geographic characteristics: District Attorneys (Manhattan, Bronx, Richmond, Queens, Kings)
Case characteristics: Offense Type (sale vs. possession), Drug Type (marijuana vs. other), Time from arrest to disposition, Disposition Year, Disposition Type (dismissed, trial, plea)
Analyses: We performed a binomial logistic regression with charge change as the dependent variable.
Y-axis = ORs; = Reference; = Higher OR;
= Lower OR
Our model accounts for approximately 48% of the variance in charge reduction.
The five New York City counties (i.e., five prosecutors) show variability in discretion within the context of similar policing policies (i.e., one police department). Relative to the reference County, the likelihood of charge reduction varied from 18% to 76%.
Disposition type had the largest odds ratio: taking a plea was associated with greater odds of receiving a reduction—a finding that comports with the extensive literature on the coercive nature of plea bargaining. Yet, it should be noted that only 1.3% of cases went to trial.
Further, in general, older age groups, males, and Black and Hispanic defendants were less likely to have a have a charge reduction. Criminal history may be an important factor. However, we were unable to include this variable in our models.
In 2009, the State eliminated mandatory prison sentences for first felony class-B drug convictions. This likely resulted in a lower likelihood of a charge reduction post-2011.
Our findings show that plea bargains have the highest odds of a charge reduction, highlighting the prosecutors powerful role in case dispositions.
Offense Characteristics
Time
STUDY*
RESULTS PREDICTING CHARGE REDUCTION
Y-axis = ORs; = Reference; = Higher OR;
= Lower OR
Defendant Characteristics
REFERENCES
1Alschuler, A. W. (1968). The prosecutor's role in plea bargaining. The University of Chicago Law Review, 36(1),
2 Holleran, D., Beichner, D., & Spohn, C. (2010). Examining charging agreement between police and prosecutors in rape cases. Crime & Delinquency, 56(3),
3Kutateladze, B. L., Andiloro, N. R., Johnson, B. D., & Spohn, C. C. (2014). Cumulative disadvantage: Examining racial and ethnic disparity in prosecution and sentencing. Criminology, 52(3),
4Frederick, B., & Stemen, D. (2012). The Anatomy of Discretion: An Analysis of Prosecutorial Decision Making Technical Report. Vera Institute of Justice
5 America’s New Drug Policy Landscape. (2014). Pew Research Center, U.S. Politics & Policy.
District Attorneys
CONTACT INFORMATION
Kristyn A. Jones
Preeti Chauhan