Prosecution of Domestic Violence Cases in the United States, 1993-1994

The purpose of this project was to evaluate the level of
 domestic violence prosecution throughout the United States and to
 promote effective prosecution approaches through dissemination of
 information. The project sought to identify and connect local
 attorneys' needs for information with the best knowledge available on
 the most effective prosecution methods. In order to appraise domestic
 violence prosecution in the United States, the researchers mailed a
 survey to a nationally-representative sample of prosecutors to assess
 prosecution strategies in domestic violence cases (Part 1,
 Prosecutors' Survey Data). Smaller jurisdictions had such a low
 response rate to the initial survey that a modified follow-up survey
 (Part 2, Prosecutors' Follow-Up Data) was administered to those
 jurisdictions. From these surveys, the researchers identified three
 sites with pioneering specialized domestic violence prosecution
 programs: Duluth, Minnesota, King County, Washington, and San
 Francisco, California. In these three sites, the researchers then
 conducted a case file analysis of a random sample of domestic violence
 cases (Part 3, Case File Data). A survey of a random sample of female
 victims was also undertaken in King County and San Francisco (Part 4,
 Victim Interview Data). In addition, the researchers conducted on-site
 evaluations of these three specialized programs in which they
 interviewed staff about the scope of the domestic violence problem,
 domestic violence support personnel, the impact of the program on the
 domestic violence problem, and recommendations for the future. The
 qualitative data collected from these evaluations are provided only in
 the codebook for this collection. Parts 1 and 2, the Prosecutors'
 Surveys, contain variables about case management, case screening and
 charging, pretrial release policies, post-charge diversion, trial,
 sentencing options, victim support programs, and office and
 jurisdiction demographics. Questions cover the volume of domestic
 violence prosecutions, formal protocols for domestic violence
 prosecution, ways to deal with uncooperative victims, pro-arrest and
 no-drop policies, protection orders, types of evidence used, and
 collaboration with other organizations to prosecute domestic violence
 cases. In addition, Part 1 includes variables on diversion programs,
 victim noncompliance, substance abuse problems, victim support
 programs, and plea negotiations. Variables in Part 3, Case File Data,
 deal with reporting, initial and final charges, injuries sustained,
 weapons used, evidence available, protection orders issued, victim
 cooperation, police testimony, disposition, sentence, costs, and
 restitution for each domestic violence case. Part 4, Victim Interview
 Data, includes variables concerning victims' employment history,
 number of children, and substance abuse, opinions about the charges
 against the defendant, decision-making in the case, and prosecution
 strategies, and victims' participation in the case, amount of support
 from and contact with criminal justice agencies, safety concerns, and
 performance evaluations of various levels of the criminal justice
system.

Tags: attorneys, battered-women, case-management, case-processing, domestic-violence, pretrial-procedures, program-evaluation, prosecution, victim-services, victims
Organization: Department of Justice