NCJ Number
204553
Date Published
March 2003
Length
59 pages
Annotation
This document discusses the results of a study on pretrial recidivism.
Abstract
Pretrial recidivism was examined among recent samples of defendants. The data were collected in the third quarter of 1998 and first quarter of 2001. This report presents findings from the 1998 sample. Comparisons were made with the findings derived from the 1989 sample. Data for the 1989 analysis were drawn from a random sample of 15,359 arrests made in 1989 in which defendants were held by the police until criminal court arraignment. Data for the 1998 analysis were drawn from a cohort of 89,524 arrests made between July 1, 1998, and September 30, 1998, in which the defendants were prosecuted on new charges. This research identified a number of factors that significantly predicted pretrial re-arrest. In both the 1989 and 1998 models, defendants with a criminal history were more likely to be re-arrested pretrial than defendants without a criminal history. The type of offense at the time of initial arrest had a significant effect on the likelihood of pretrial re-arrest. The two samples differed with respect to the specific type of offense. In the 1989 model, defendants initially arrested for property and drug offenses were more likely to be re-arrested than defendants with the mean effect of the offense type. In the 1998 model, the odds of being re-arrested pretrial were higher among defendants initially charged with drug offenses. In both models, the odds of pretrial re-arrest were lower among violent offenders. The findings based on the 1989 and 1998 analyses suggested higher re-arrest rates among Blacks. Gender was significantly related to pretrial recidivism; males were more likely to be re-arrested than females. The probability of being re-arrested decreased as the age of the defendant at the time of initial arrest increased. Being employed, in school, or in a training program full-time contributed significantly to predicting pretrial re-arrest. These findings suggest that knowing what predicts pretrial failure-to-appear rates may not be adequate when attempting to discern what predicts pretrial re-arrest. 9 tables, 44 references