AndreaBozzo/ceres-open-data-index huggingface dataset:
A Sentencing Postscript: Felony Probationers Under Supervision in the Community, 1983

This study provides an overview of how the supervision of a
 class of felony probationers operates in a jurisdiction, and gives a
 baseline against which the impact of changes to probationary
 supervision can be measured. The objectives of this study were to
 describe the demographic characteristics of probationers, the nature
 and level of supervision that probationers receive, the extent and
 types of specified conditions imposed on probationers, the degree of
 probationer compliance with these specified conditions, the extent to
 which probationers are arrested and/or subjected to probationary
 disciplinary hearings while under supervision, and the exit status of
probationers from community supervision.

Tags: demographic-characteristics, felony-offenses, offenders, probation, probationers
Organization: Department of Justice
Penal Code Citations:  Sentencing in 18 American Felony Courts, 1983

The purpose of this study was to describe sentencing
 outcomes in 18 jurisdictions across the United States based on
 sentences actually imposed on adjudicated felons. Such descriptive
 information provides an overview of how sentencing is operating in a
 jurisdiction as a whole and supplies a baseline against which the
 impact of changes in sentencing codes and practices can be
 assessed. The data focus on sentences handed down in courts of general
 jurisdiction for selected crimes of homicide, rape, robbery,
aggravated assault, burglary, theft, and drug trafficking.

Tags: courts, felony-offenses, homicide, judicial-decisions, rape, robbery, sentencing, sentencing-guidelines
Organization: Department of Justice
Executions in the United States, 1608-2002:  The ESPY File

This collection furnishes data on executions performed under
civil authority in the United States between 1608 and 2002. The dataset
describes each individual executed and the circumstances surrounding
the crime for which the person was convicted. Variables include age,
race, name, sex, and occupation of the offender, place, jurisdiction,
date, and method of execution, and the crime for which the offender was
executed. Also recorded are data on whether the only evidence for the
execution was official records indicating that an individual
(executioner or slave owner) was compensated for an execution.

Tags: capital-punishment, crime, criminal-justice-system, executions, historical-data, offenders, offenses
Organization: Department of Justice
Judicial District Data Book, 1983:  [United States]

The Federal Judicial Center contracted with Claritas
 Corporation to produce the three data files in this collection from
 the Census Bureau's 1983 County and City Data Book. The data, which
 are summarized by judicial units, were compiled from a county-level
 file and include information on area and population, households, vital
 statistics, health, income, crime rates, housing, education, labor
 force, government finances, manufacturers, wholesale and retail trade,
service industries, and agriculture.

Tags: agriculture, census-data, counties, crime, criminal-justice-system, demographic-characteristics, education, government-expenditures, health, households, housing, income, industry, labor-force, manufacturing-industry, population, service-industry, trade, united-states, vital-statistics
Organization: Department of Justice
National Indigent Criminal Defense Survey, 1982

This survey was conducted to provide national-level data on
basic information such as system types, funding sources, costs, and
caseloads of indigent defense programs for defense practitioners,
policymakers, and planners in the criminal justice system. The goal of
the survey was to provide data that could begin to answer questions
regarding the nature and scope of indigent service delivery.
Specifically, the three basic objectives were to provide descriptive
data, to assess the level of response to defense service delivery
requirements, and to facilitate further research.

Tags: caseloads, criminal-justice-system, defense-law, legal-aid, legal-representation, public-defenders
Organization: Department of Justice
National Crime Surveys Extract:  Personal Crime Longitudinal Files, 1976-1982

The National Crime Survey (NCS) collects data on personal
and household victimization through an ongoing national survey of
households and household members. Only data for robbery and assaults
are included in this dataset. There are two data files: Assault Victim
Experiences, and Victim and Non-Victim Responses. Items included are
time and place of occurrence, injuries suffered, medical expenses
incurred, number, age, race, and sex of offender(s), relationship of
offender(s) to victim, marital status, employment, military
experience, and residency.

Tags: assault, crime, demographic-characteristics, households, justice, medical-care, medical-history, robbery, victimization, victims
Organization: Department of Justice
National Crime Surveys:  Index of Crime Severity, 1977

The purpose of this data collection was to determine the 
 seriousness of criminal events. The principal investigators sought to 
 determine and rate the relative seriousness of murder, rape, and petty 
 theft. Information in the collection includes respondents' opinions on 
 the severity of particular crimes as well as how that severity compared 
to other crimes.

Tags: crime, murder, petty-theft, rape
Organization: Department of Justice
Prosecutor's Management Information System (PROMIS), Rhode Island, 1979

The Prosecutor's Management Information System (PROMIS) is
a computer-based information system for public prosecution agencies.
PROMIS was initially developed with funds from the United States Law
Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA) to cope with problems of
a large, urban prosecution agency where mass production operations had
superseded the traditional practice of a single attorney preparing and
prosecuting a given case from inception to final disposition. The
combination of massive volumes of cases and assembly-line
fragmentation of responsibility and control had created a situation in
which one case was indistinguishable from another and the effects of
problems at various stages in the assembly line on ultimate case
disposition went undetected and uncorrected. One unique feature of
PROMIS that addresses these problems is the automated evaluation of
cases. Through the application of a uniform set of criteria, PROMIS
assigns two numerical ratings to each case: one signifying the gravity
of the crimes through the measurement of the amount of harm done to
society, and the other signifying the gravity of the prior record of
the accused. These ratings make it possible to select the more
important cases for intensive, pre-trial preparation and to assure
even-handed treatment of cases with similar degrees of gravity. A
complementary feature of PROMIS is the automation of reasons for
decisions made or actions taken along the assembly line. Reasons for
dismissing cases prior to trial on their merits can be related to
earlier cycles of postponement for various reasons and the reasoning
behind intake and screening decisions. The PROMIS data include
information about the defendant, case characteristics and processes,
charge, sentencing and continuance processes, and the
witnesses/victims involved in the case. PROMIS was first used in 1971
in the United States Attorney's Office for the District of
Columbia. To enhance the ability to transfer the concepts and software
to other communities, LEAA awarded a grant to the Institute for Law
xand Social Research (INSLAW) in Washington, DC. The Rhode Island
PROMIS data collection is a product of this grant.

Tags: case-management, case-processing, computer-programs, court-cases, crime, criminal-justice-system, databases, decision-making, defendants, disposition-legal, information-systems, prosecuting-attorneys, sentencing, victims, witnesses
Organization: Department of Justice
Federal Justice Statistics Program: Defendants in Federal Criminal Cases in District Court -- Pending, 2011

The data contain records of defendants in criminal cases filed in United States District Court before or during fiscal year 2011 and still pending as of year-end. The data were constructed from the Administrative Office of the United States District Courts' (AOUSC) criminal file. Defendants in criminal cases may be either individuals or corporations. There is one record for each defendant in each case filed. Included in the records are data from court proceedings and offense codes for up to five offenses charged at the time the case was filed. (The most serious charge at termination may differ from the most serious charge at case filing, due to plea bargaining or action of the judge or jury.) In a case with multiple charges against the defendant, a "most serious" offense charge is determined by a hierarchy of offenses based on statutory maximum penalties associated with the charges. The data file contains variables from the original AOUSC files as well as additional analysis variables, or "SAF" variables, that denote subsets of the data. These SAF variables are related to statistics reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, Tables 4.1-4.5 and 5.1-5.6. Variables containing identifying information (e.g., name, Social Security number) were replaced with blanks, and the day portions of date fields were also sanitized in order to protect the identities of individuals. These data are part of a series designed by the Urban Institute (Washington, DC) and the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data and documentation were prepared by the Urban Institute.

Tags: administration, court-cases, criminal-law, defendants, district-courts, federal-courts, judicial-decisions, legal-systems, trial-courts
Organization: Department of Justice
Long-Range Planning Survey of Federal Judges, 1992: [United States]

In October 1992, the Federal Judicial Center surveyed nearly 
 all federal judges on a wide range of issues of concern to the federal 
 courts. The survey was conducted for two purposes: to inform the 
 deliberations of the Judicial Conference Committee on Long-Range 
 Planning and to provide information for the Center's 
 congressionally-mandated study of structural alternatives for the 
 federal courts of appeals. Although the purposes were distinct, the 
 areas of interest overlapped, resulting in a survey instrument that 
 addressed many issues at differing levels of detail. The survey 
 questions dealt with the nature and severity of problems in the federal 
 courts, structure and relationships, jurisdiction size and resources, 
 administration and governance, discovery, juries, criminal sanctions, 
 deciding appeals in the current system, availability and compensation 
of counsel, and methods of civil dispute resolution.

Tags: appellate-courts, criminal-justice-system, federal-courts, judges
Organization: Department of Justice
Mandatory Drug offender Processing Data, 1986: Alaska, California, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, and Virginia

The National Consortium for Assessing Drug Control
Initiatives, funded by the Bureau of Justice Assistance and
coordinated by the Criminal Justice Statistics Association, collected
drug offender processing data from eight states: Alaska, California,
Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, New York, North Carolina, and Virginia. The
purpose of the project was to track adult drug offenders from the
point of entry into the criminal justice system (typically by arrest)
through final court disposition, regardless of whether the offender
was released without trial, acquitted, or convicted. These data allow
researchers to examine how the criminal justice system processes drug
offenders, to measure the changing volume of drug offenders moving
through the different segments of the criminal justice system, to
calculate processing time intervals between major decision-making
events, and to assess the changing structure of the drug offender
population. For purposes of this project, a drug offender was defined
as any person who had been charged with a felony drug offense. The
data are structured into six segments pertaining to (1) record
identification, (2) the offender (date of birth, sex, race, ethnic
origin), (3) arrest information (date of arrest, age at arrest, arrest
charge code), (4) prosecution information (filed offense code and
level, prosecution disposition and date), (5) court disposition
information (disposition offense and level, court disposition, final
disposition date, final pleading, type of trial), and (6) sentencing
information (sentence and sentence date, sentence minimum and
maximum). Also included are elapsed time variables. The unit of
analysis is the felony drug offender.

Tags: acquittals, arrest-procedures, convictions-law, disposition-legal, drug-law-enforcement, drug-offenders, sentencing, trials
Organization: Department of Justice
State Court Organization, 1998: [United States]

This data collection provides detailed comparative
information about the structure, policies, and procedures of statewide
trial and appellate court systems for the 50 states, the District of
Columbia, and Puerto Rico as of July 1, 1998. Information gathered
includes the number of courts and judges, judicial selection,
governance of court systems, including judicial funding,
administration, staffing, and procedures, jury qualifications and
verdict rules, and processing and sentencing procedures of criminal
cases.

Tags: appellate-courts, court-system, judge-selection, judges, juries, policies-and-procedures, state-courts, trial-courts, verdicts
Organization: Department of Justice
Juror Discussions About Evidence, 1997-1998: [Arizona]

These data were collected in conjunction with an evaluation
 of the Arizona court reform effective December 1, 1995, to permit
 jurors in civil cases to discuss the evidence prior to
 deliberations. The datasets consist of survey responses by judges,
 jurors, attorneys, and litigants in all civil cases conducted in
 Maricopa, Pima, Mohave, and Yavapai counties in Arizona between June
 15, 1997, and January 31, 1998. Civil cases in the participating
 courts were randomly assigned to one of two experimental conditions:
 (1) jurors were told they could discuss the evidence prior to
 deliberation according to Rule 39(f) of the Arizona Rules of Civil
 Procedure, or (2) jurors were told they could not discuss the evidence
 per the previous admonition. The datasets contain survey responses
 under both conditions. Part 1, Case Characteristics Data, contains
 information from two questionnaires completed by judges about the
 lawsuit, the parties, the trial procedures, and the case outcome. The
 data in Part 2, Juror Questionnaire Data, cover jurors' views
 regarding the complexity of the case, the importance of witnesses and
 testimonies, and attorneys' performances. The variables in Part 3,
 Attorney Questionnaire Data, offer information on attorneys' opinions
 of the jurors, the opposing counsel, and the verdict. Part 4, Litigant
 Questionniare Data, consists of litigants' views regarding the jurors
 and the verdict. Demographic data include respondents' gender, age,
race, income, and job status.

Tags: attorneys, case-processing, court-cases, courts, judges, judicial-decisions, judicial-process, juries, jury-deliberations, jury-instructions, trial-procedures
Organization: Department of Justice
Recidivism of Prisoners Released in 1994

RECIDIVISM OF PRISONERS RELEASED IN 1994
is a database containing information on each of 38,624 sampled
prisoners released from prisons in 15 states in 1994 and tracked for
three years following their release. The majority of the database
consists of information on each released prisoner's entire officially
recorded criminal history (before and after the 1994 release). Sources
for criminal history information are state and FBI automated RAP
("Records of Arrests and Prosecutions") sheets, which contain records
of arrests, adjudications, and sentences. The study is the second
major recidivism study conducted by the Bureau of Justice Statistics.
The first study, RECIDIVISM AMONG RELEASED PRISONERS, 1983: [UNITED
STATES] (ICPSR 8875), tracked over 16,000 prisoners released in 11
states in 1983 for three years. These two studies are the
closest approximation to "national" recidivism studies in the United
States. They are distinguished by their large sample size (over 16,000
released prisoners in the first study, 38,624 in the second),
geographic breadth of coverage (11 states in the first study, 15 in
the second), length of prospective tracking (three years from date of
release in both studies), ability to track the movement of released
prisoners across state boundaries (both studies), and multiple
measures of recidivism (both studies). Demographic data include race,
ethnicity, sex, and date of birth.

Tags: arrest-records, conviction-records, criminal-histories, offenses, recidivism
Organization: Department of Justice
Recidivism Among Released Prisoners, 1983:  [United States]

This data collection provides comprehensive criminal history
data on prisoners released from custody in 1983. Precise estimates are
supplied on recidivism among prisoners of all ages with all types of
postrelease supervision. Data cover recidivism both within and outside
the states in which the prisoners were released. Variables include
sociodemographic indices, type of sentence, length of sentence, offense,
court action, and date of court action.

Tags: criminal-histories, ex-offenders, offenders, postrelease-programs, recidivism
Organization: Department of Justice
Traffic Stop Data Collection Policies for State Police, 2004

This collection contains survey data collected at the end
of October 2004 from the 49 state law enforcement agencies in the
United States that had traffic patrol responsibility. Information was
gathered about their policies for recording race and ethnicity data
for persons in traffic stops, including the circumstances under which
demographic data should be collected for traffic-related stops and
whether such information should be stored in an electronically
accessible format. The survey was not designed to obtain available
agency databases containing traffic stop records.

Tags: ethnic-identity, ethnicity, police-patrol, policies-and-procedures, race, traffic-offenses
Organization: Department of Justice
Survey of Youths in Custody, 1987:  [United States]

This data collection, the first survey of youths confined to 
 long-term, state-operated institutions, was undertaken to complement 
 existing Children in Custody censuses. It also serves as a companion to 
 the Surveys of State Prisons, allowing comparisons between adult and 
 juvenile populations. The survey provides detailed information on the 
 characteristics of youths held primarily in secure settings within the 
 juvenile justice system. The data contain information on criminal 
 histories, family situations, drug and alcohol use, and peer group 
 activities. For youths committed for violent acts, data are available 
on the victims of their crimes and on weapon use.

Tags: alcohol-abuse, criminal-histories, drug-abuse, family-history, juvenile-crime, juvenile-inmates, juvenile-offenders, prisons
Organization: Department of Justice
Survey of Adults on Probation, 1995:  [United States]

The 1995 Survey of Adults on Probation (SAP) was the first
 national survey to gather information on the individual
 characteristics of adult probationers. The SAP was a two-part
 nationally representative survey consisting of a records check based
 on probation office administrative records and personal interviews
 with probationers. The records check provided detailed information
 for 5,867 probationers on current offenses and sentences, criminal
 histories, levels of supervision and contacts, disciplinary hearings
 and outcomes, and demographic characteristics. Only adults with a
 formal sentence to probation who were not considered absconders were
 included in the records check. Excluded were persons supervised by a
 federal probation agency, those only on parole, persons on presentence
 or pretrial diversion, juveniles, and absconders. The records check
 forms were completed by a probation officer or by another person
 knowledgeable about probation office records. A subset of the
 population selected for the records check was selected for a personal
 interview, resulting in a total of 2,030 completed interviews. The
 personal interview sample excluded from the records check sample
 probationers not on active probation (defined as being required to
 make office visits at any interval), those incarcerated, and those in
 residential treatment. Respondents were asked about current
 offense(s) and supervision, criminal history, alcohol and drug use and
 treatment, mental health treatment, demographic characteristics, and a
 variety of socioeconomic characteristics such as employment, income,
 receipt of welfare, housing, number of children and child support, and
living conditions while growing up.

Tags: arrest-records, criminal-histories, demographic-characteristics, offender-profiles, probation, probationers, sentencing, supervised-liberty
Organization: Department of Justice
State and Local Prosecution and Civil Attorney Systems, 1976

The purpose of this data collection was to establish a
 current name and address listing of state and local government
 prosecution and civil attorney agencies and to obtain information
 about agency function, jurisdiction, employment, funding, and attorney
 compensation arrangements. The data for each agency include
 information for any identifiable local police prosecutors. Excluded
 from the study were private law firms that perform legal services
 periodically for a government and are compensated by retainers and
 fees. Variables cover agency functions and jurisdiction, agency
 funding, number and types of employees, compensation and employment
 restrictions for attorneys, agency's geographical jurisdiction, number
of branch offices, and number of branch office employees.

Tags: attorneys, databases, law-enforcement-agencies, legal-aid, legal-systems, prosecuting-attorneys, prosecution
Organization: Department of Justice
State and Local Probation and Parole Systems, 1976

This study is a census of all state and local probation and
 parole systems. It was conducted in late 1976 by the United States
 Census Bureau for the Bureau of Justice Statistics. The data contain
 information on each agency, including jurisdiction, funding and
operation, employment, and client caseload.

Tags: criminal-justice-system, jurisdiction, parole, probation
Organization: Department of Justice
Recidivism of Felons on Probation, 1986-1989:  [United States]

This data collection provides an overview of how probation 
 cases are processed in 32 urban and suburban jurisdictions in the 
 United States and gauges the extent to which variations in probation 
 patterns exist between jurisdictions. Data were collected on offenders 
 who were sentenced in 1986 and who committed one or more of the 
 following types of offenses: homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated 
 assault, burglary, larceny, drug trafficking, and other felony crimes. 
 Probation history questionnaires were completed during the last half of 
 1989. Information is available on number of conviction charges, race, 
 age, sex, marital status, educational level, and ethnicity of the 
 probationer. In addition, data on drug and alcohol use and treatment, 
sentencing, restitution, and offenses are provided.

Tags: assault, burglary, case-processing, drug-traffic, felony-offenses, homicide, larceny, offenders, probation, recidivism, robbery, suburbs, urban-areas
Organization: Department of Justice