Bureau of Justice Statistics

Special Report

November 2007, NCJ 214994

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

State Court Processing Statistics, 1990-2004

Pretrial Release of Felony 

Defendants in State Courts

By Thomas H. Cohen, Ph.D.

and Brian A. Reaves, Ph.D.

BJS Statisticians

Between 1990 and 2004, 62% of felony defendants in State 

courts in the 75 largest counties were released prior to the 

disposition of their case. Beginning in 1998, financial pretrial releases, requiring the posting of bail, were more prevalent than non-financial releases. This increase in the use 

of financial releases was mostly the result of a decrease in 

the use of release on recognizance (ROR), coupled with an 

increase in the use of commercial surety bonds. These 

findings are from a multi-year analysis of felony cases from 

the biennial State Court Processing Statistics (SCPS) program, sponsored by the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Among defendants detained until case disposition, 1 in 6 

had been denied bail and 5 in 6 had bail set with financial 

conditions required for release that were not met. The 

higher the bail amount set, the lower the probability of 

release. About 7 in 10 defendants secured release when 

bail was set at less than $5,000, but this proportion 

dropped to 1 in 10 when bail was set at $100,000 or more.

Murder defendants were the least likely to be released pretrial. Defendants charged with rape, robbery, burglary, and 

motor vehicle theft also had release rates lower than the 

overall average. The highest release rate was for defendants charged with fraud. 

Defendants were less likely to be released if they had a 

prior arrest or conviction or an active criminal justice status 

at the time of arrest (such as those on probation or parole). 

A history of missed court appearances also reduced the 

likelihood that a defendant would be released. 

About a third of released defendants were charged with 

one or more types of pretrial misconduct. Nearly a fourth 

had a bench warrant issued for failing to appear in court, 

and about a sixth were arrested for a new offense. More 

than half of these new arrests were for felonies. 

Logistic regression analyses that controlled for factors such 

as offense and criminal history found that Hispanics were 

less likely than non-Hispanic defendants to be released, 

and males were less likely than females to be released. 

Logistic regression was also used to calculate the probability of pretrial misconduct for defendants with a given characteristic, independent of other factors. Characteristics 

associated with a greater probability of being rearrested 

while on pretrial release included being under age 21, having a prior arrest record, having a prior felony conviction, 

being released on an unsecured bond, or being part of an 

emergency release to relieve jail crowding. 

Compared to release on recognizance, defendants on 

financial release were more likely to make all scheduled 

court appearances. Defendants released on an unsecured 

bond or as part of an emergency release were most likely 

to have a bench warrant issued because they failed to 

appear in court. The probability of failing to appear in court 

was higher among defendants who were black or Hispanic, 

had an active criminal justice status at the time of arrest, or 

had a prior failure to appear. 

Since 1998, most pretrial releases of State court felony 

defendants in the 75 largest counties have been under 

financial conditions requiring the posting of bail

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Total released

Financial release

Non-financial release

Percent of defendants
2 Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts

About 3 in 5 felony defendants in the 75 largest 

counties were released prior to case disposition

From 1990 to 2004, an estimated 62% of State court felony 

defendants in the 75 largest counties were released prior to 

the disposition of their case (table 1). Defendants were 

about as likely to be released on financial conditions 

requiring the posting of bail (30%) as to be granted a nonfinancial release (32%). Among the 38% of defendants 

detained until case disposition, about 5 in 6 had a bail 

amount set but did not post the financial bond required for 

release.

From 1990 to 2004, surety bond (33%) and release on 

recognizance (32%) each accounted for about a third of all 

releases. Other release types that accounted for at least 

5% of releases during this period were conditional release 

(12%), deposit bond (9%), unsecured bond (7%), and full 

cash bond (5%). (See box on page 3 for definitions of 

release types.) 

Since 1998 a majority of pretrial releases have included 

financial conditions

Except for a decline to 57% in 2004, the percentage of 

defendants released each year varied only slightly, from 

62% to 64%. A more pronounced trend was observed in 

the type of release used (figure 1). From 1990 to 1998, the 

percentage of released defendants under financial conditions rose from 24% to 36%, while non-financial releases 

dropped from 40% to 28%. 

Surety bond surpassed release on recognizance in 

1998 as the most common type of pretrial release 

The trend away from non-financial releases to financial 

releases was accompanied by an increase in the use of 

surety bonds and a decrease in the use of release on 

recognizance (ROR) (figure 2). From 1990 through 1994, 

ROR accounted for 41% of releases, compared to 24% for 

surety bond. In 2002 and 2004, surety bonds were used for 

42% of releases, compared to 23% for ROR.

Type of pretrial release

Percent of all 

releases, 

1990-2004

Financial conditions 48%

Surety bond 33

Deposit bond 9

Full cash bond 5

Property bond 2

Non-financial conditions 51%

Recognizance 32

Conditional 12

Unsecured bond 7

Emergency release 1%

Number of releases 264,604

Detention-release outcomes for State court felony 

defendants in the 75 largest counties, 1990-2004

Figure 1

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Non-financial release

Held on bail

Financial release

Denied bail

Percent of defendants Table 1. Type of pretrial release or detention for State court 

felony defendants in the 75 largest counties, 1990-2004

Detention-release 

outcome

State court felony defendants 

in the 75 largest counties

Number Percent

Total 424,252 100%

Released before case disposition 264,604 62%

Financial conditions 125,650 30%

Surety bond 86,107 20

Deposit bond 23,168 6

Full cash bond 12,348 3

Property bond 4,027 1

Non-financial conditions 136,153 32%

Personal recognizance 85,330 20

Conditional release 32,882 8

Unsecured bond 17,941 4

Emergency release 2,801 1%

Detained until case disposition 159,647 38%

Held on bail 132,572 32

Denied bail 27,075 6

Note: Counts based on weighted data representing 8 months (the 

month of May from each even-numbered year). Detail may not add 

to total because of rounding.

Type of pretrial release of State court felony defendants in 

the 75 largest counties, 1990-2004

Figure 2 

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Surety bond

Recognizance

Conditional

Deposit bond

Unsecured bond

Full cash bond

Percent of released defendants
Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts 3

Two-thirds of defendants had financial conditions 

required for release in 2004, compared to half in 1990

Including both released and detained defendants, the percentage required to post bond to secure release rose from 

53% in 1990 to 68% in 2004 (not shown in table). Overall, 

about half (48%) of defendants required to post bail for 

release did so. From 1998 through 2004, 51% posted bail, 

compared to 45% in prior years.

The higher the bail amount the lower the probability 

of pretrial release

The median bail amount for detained defendants ($15,000) 

was 3 times that of released defendants ($5,000); the 

mean amount was about 5 times higher ($58,400 versus 

$11,600) (not shown in table). For all defendants with a bail 

amount set, the median bail amount was $9,000 and the 

mean was $35,800.

There was a direct relationship between the bail amount 

and the probability of release. When the bail was under 

$10,000, most defendants secured release, including 7 in 

10 defendants with bail under $5,000 (figure 3). The proportion released declined as the bail amount increased, 

dropping to 1 in 10 when bail was $100,000 or higher.

Defendants arrested for violent offenses or who had a 

criminal record were most likely to have a high bail 

amount or be denied bail

Courts typically use an offense-based schedule when setting bail. After assessing the likelihood that a defendant, if 

released, will not appear in court and assessing any danger 

the defendant may present to the community, the court may 

adjust the bail higher or lower. In the most serious cases, 

the court may deny bail altogether. The use of a high bail 

amount or the denial of bail was most evident in cases 

involving serious violent offenses. Eighty percent of defendants charged with murder had one of these conditions; 

with rape, 34%; and with robbery, 30% (table 2). 

Defendants who had an active criminal justice status (13%) 

were about 4 times as likely as other defendants (3%) to 

have bail denied. Defendants with 1 or more prior felony 

convictions (10%) were more than twice as likely as those 

without such a conviction (4%) to have bail denied.

Types of pretrial release used in State courts

Type of release Defendant

Financial liability for 

failure to appear

Liable 

party

Financial

Surety bond Pays fee (usually 10% of bail amount) plus collateral if required,

to commercial bail agent.

Full bail amount Bail agent

Deposit bond Posts deposit (usually 10% of bail amount) with court, which 

is usually refunded at successful completion of case. 

Full bail amount Defendant

Full cash bond Posts full bail amount with court. Full bail amount Defendant

Property bond Posts property title as collateral with court. Full bail amount Defendant

Non-financial

Release on recognizance 

(ROR)

Signs written agreement to appear in court (includes citation 

releases by law enforcement).

None N/A

Conditional (supervised)

release

Agrees to comply with specific conditions such as regular reporting

or drug use monitoring.

None N/A

Unsecured bond Has a bail amount set, but no payment is required to secure release. Full bail amount Defendant

Emergency release Released as part of a court order to relieve jail crowding. None N/A

Bail amount and release rates for State court felony 

defendants in the 75 largest counties, 1990-2004

Figure 3 

Bail amount set

Percent of defendants released

Under $5,000

$5,000-$9,999

$10,000-$24,999

$25,000-$49,999

$50,000 - $99,999

$100,000 or more

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Table 2. State court felony defendants in the 75 largest 

counties with bail set at $50,000 or more or denied bail, 

1990-2004

 Percent of defendants

Characteristic

Bail $50,000 

or more Denied bail

Most serious arrest charge

Murder 35% 45%

Rape 25 9

Robbery 20 10

Assault 13 7

Non-violent offenses 7 6

 Criminal justice status at arrest

Active 13% 13%

None 8 3

Prior felony conviction

Yes 13% 10%

No 7 4
4 Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts

Commercial bail and pretrial release

An estimated 14,000 commercial bail agents 

nationwide secure the release of more than 2 

million defendants annually, according to the 

Professional Bail Agents of the United States. 

(See Methodology for other sources on bail and 

pretrial release.) Bond forfeiture regulations and 

procedures vary by jurisdiction, but most States 

regulate commercial bail and license bail agents 

through their departments of insurance. Four 

States do not allow commercial bail: Illinois, 

Kentucky, Oregon, and Wisconsin. Also, the 

District of Columbia, Maine, and Nebraska have 

little commercial bail activity.

Bail agents generally operate as independent 

contractors using credentials of a surety company 

when posting appearance bond for their client. 

For a fee, the surety company allows the bail 

agent to use its financial standing and credit as 

security on bonds. In turn, the bail agent charges 

the defendant a fee (usually 10% of the bail 

amount) for services. In addition, the bail agent 

often requires collateral from the defendant.

A bail agent usually has an opportunity to recover a defendant if they fail to appear. If the defendant is not returned, 

the agent is liable to the court for the full bail amount. Most 

jurisdictions permit revocation of the bond, which allows 

the agent to return the defendant to custody before the 

court date, freeing the agent from liability. The agent may 

be required to refund the defendant’s fee in such cases. 

Courts can also set aside forfeiture judgments if good 

cause is shown as to why a defendant did not appear. 

Commercial bail has been a target of critics since the 

1960s. Some organizations, such as the American Bar 

Association and the National District Attorney’s Association, have recommended its abolishment. Some critics 

have succeeded in obtaining reforms in the release process, beginning with the Manhattan Bail Project in 1961. 

This project showed that defendants could be successfully 

released pretrial without the financial guarantee of a 

surety bail agent if verified information concerning their 

stability and community ties were presented to the court. 

The success of the Manhattan Bail Project resulted in a 

wide range of pretrial reforms in the Federal system, culminating in the Bail Reform Act of 1966. This Act created a 

presumption in favor of release for most non-capital defendants and led to the creation of non-surety release 

options, such as refundable deposit bail and conditional 

release. Many States followed the Federal system and 

created such release options. The Bail Reform Act of 1984 

set forth new procedures which allowed the pretrial detention of defendants believed to be a danger to the community in addition to a flight risk. 

Commercial bail agents are active in almost every State

Commercial bail allowed

Commercial bail allowed but rarely used

Commercial bail not allowed

Pros and cons of commercial bail

Issue Proponents: Critics:

Jail crowding Reduces jail population by providing a means for 

defendants to obtain pretrial release.

Increases jail population because indigent defendants 

can’t afford commercial bail services. Others are 

passed over because they are seen as a flight risk.

Private enterprise Provides pretrial release and monitoring services at 

no cost to taxpayers. 

A private, for-profit entity should not be involved in the 

detention-release decision process. 

Performance incentives Creates an incentive that results in the majority of 

defendants being returned to court because the bail 

agent is liable for defendants who fail to appear.

Bail agents don’t always have their bonds forfeited or 

actively pursue absconders.

Value of service Provides the opportunity for many defendants to 

secure their freedom while awaiting disposition of 

their case.

The fee and collateral are typically more than indigent 

defendants can afford. Defendants who have the money 

would be better off spending it on legal representation.
Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts 5

Financial releases took longer on average than 

non-financial releases

About half of all pretrial releases occurred within 1 day of 

arrest, and about three-fourths within 1 week. Non-financial 

releases (59%) were more likely to occur within a day of 

arrest than financial releases (45%). For all release types, 

more than 90% occurred within 1 month of arrest. Among 

defendants released under financial conditions, the amount 

of time from arrest to release increased with bail amounts, 

ranging from a mean of 8 days for those with a bail amount 

of less than $5,000 to 22 days for bail amounts of $50,000 

or more (not shown in table).

About a quarter of released defendants had failed to 

appear in court during a prior case 

A majority (61%) of the defendants released into the community to await disposition of their case had been arrested 

previously (table 3). This included 27% who had failed to 

appear in court during a prior case. About half had 1 or 

more prior convictions (48%), and nearly a third (30%) had 

at least one prior felony conviction. About 1 in 4 released 

defendants had an active criminal justice status from a prior 

case at the time of their arrest. 

Cumlative percent of releases occurring 

within — 

1 day 1 week 1 month

All releases 52% 78% 92%

Financial 45 76 92

Non-financial 59 80 93

Table 3. Criminal history of released and detained State 

court felony defendants in 75 largest counties, 1990-2004

Criminal history

Released 

defendants

Detained 

defendants

Prior arrest 61% 83%

With at least 1 failure-to-appear 27 44

Prior conviction 48% 75%

Felony 30 57

Violent felony 7 15

Active criminal justice status 27% 51%

The role of pretrial services programs in the release process

According to a BJA nationwide study, about 300 

pretrial services programs were operating in the U.S. 

during 2001.* More than two-thirds of the programs 

had begun since 1980 and nearly half since 1990. 

The programs operated in a variety of administrative 

settings, including probation offices, courts, sheriffs’ 

offices, independent agencies, and private non-profit 

organizations.

Pretrial programs play an important role in the release 

process. Standards published by the American Bar 

Association and the National Association of Pretrial 

Services Agencies have specified core functions a 

model pretrial program should provide. 

Information gathering and assessment 

An important function of a pretrial program is to 

conduct a pretrial investigation to assist judicial 

officers in making release decisions. Prior to the initial 

court appearance, the pretrial program gathers 

information about the defendant, primarily through 

voluntary interviews and records checks. Some 

defendants may not be eligible for pretrial release 

because of the severity of the charged offense or an 

existing criminal justice status such as parole, 

probation, or an outstanding warrant.

*John Clark and D. Alan Henry, Pretrial Services Programming at the 

Start of the 21st Century: A Survey of Pretrial Services Programs, Washington D.C.: Bureau of Justice Assistance, July 2003 (NCJ 199773). 

Information collected from the pretrial investigation 

typically includes:

• residency 

• employment status

• community ties

• criminal record

• court appearance record

• criminal justice status

• mental health status

• indications of substance abuse

Often a risk assessment tool is used to incorporate 

the information from the pretrial investigation into a 

score that guides the release decision. Periodic 

validation of the instrument ensures that it provides an 

accurate, unbiased measure of a defendant’s 

potential for misconduct if released. 

Supervision and follow-up 

Pretrial services programs provide supervision and 

monitoring of a defendant’s compliance with release 

conditions, such as testing for drug or alcohol use and 

electronic monitoring of defendants confined to a 

restricted area. These programs also assist with 

locating and returning defendants who fail to appear 

in court. Such assistance may include providing 

information to law enforcement officials or working 

directly with defendants to persuade them to return. 

Pretrial programs may regularly review the status of 

detained defendants for changes in their eligibility for 

release and facilitate their release where appropriate. 
6 Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts

Prior criminal activity was more prevalent among pretrial 

detainees. About half had a criminal justice status at the 

time of arrest. A large majority had prior arrests (83%) and 

convictions (75%). More than half (57%) had a prior felony 

conviction, including 15% with a conviction for a violent felony. Nearly half (44%) had a prior failure to appear. 

Many factors influence the pretrial release decision

SCPS collects information on some of the factors courts 

consider when making pretrial release decisions, such as 

arrest offenses, criminal justice status, prior arrests, prior 

court appearance record, and prior convictions. It does not 

collect data on residency, employment status, community 

ties, mental health status, or substance abuse history. 

The unique contribution of the factors collected in SCPS to 

the release decision can be assessed using logistic regression techniques. Logistic regression produces nonlinear 

estimations for each independent variable which can be 

transformed into predicted probabilities (table 4). In the 

case of pretrial release, the logistic regression analyses 

yielded patterns similar to that of the bivariate results. (See 

Methodology for more information on the logistic regression 

techniques).

Murder defendants (19%) had the lowest probability of 

being released, followed by those charged with robbery 

(44%), burglary (49%), motor vehicle theft (49%), or rape 

(53%). Defendants charged with fraud (82%) were the most 

likely to be released. 

Male and Hispanic defendants less likely to be released 

than females and whites

Female defendants (74%) were more likely than males 

(60%) to be released pretrial. By race and Hispanic origin, 

non-Hispanic whites (68%) had a higher probability of 

release than Hispanics (55%). Pretrial detention rates for 

Hispanics may have been influenced by the use of immigration holds to detain those illegally in the U.S.

Defendants with a prior criminal record less likely to be 

released than those without a prior arrest

Defendants on parole (26%) or probation (43%) at the time 

of their arrest for the current offense were less likely to be 

released than those without an active criminal justice status 

(70%). Defendants who had a prior arrest, whether they 

had previously failed to appear in court (50%) or not (59%), 

had a lower probability of release than those without a prior 

arrest (79%). 

Defendants with a prior conviction (51%, not shown in 

table) had a lower probability of being released than those 

without a conviction (77%). This was true even if the prior 

convictions were for misdemeanors only (63%). The effect 

of a conviction record on release was more pronounced if 

the defendant had at least one prior felony conviction 

(46%).

Table 4. State court felony defendants in the 75 largest 

counties released prior to case disposition, 1990-2004

Variable

Percent 

released

Predicted 

probability 

of release 

Most serious arrest charge

Murder 19% 11%**

Rape 53 44**

Robbery 44 36**

Assault 64 59*

Burglary 49 49**

Motor vehicle theft 49 50**

Larceny/theft 68 66

Forgery 72 67

Fraud 82 76**

Drug sales (reference) 63 63

Other drug (non-sales) 68 70*

Weapons 67 65

Driving-related 73 76**

Age at arrest

Under 21 (reference) 68% 64%

21-29 62 63

30-39 59 60**

40 or older 62 60**

Gender

Male (reference) 60% 60%

Female 74 69**

Race/Hispanic origin 

White non-Hispanic (reference) 68% 66%

Black non-Hispanic 62 64

Other non-Hispanic 65 63*

Hispanic, any race 55 51**

Criminal justice status at arrest 

No active status (reference) 70% 67%

Released on pending case 61 63

On probation 43 49**

On parole 26 37**

Prior arrest and court appearance

No prior arrests (reference) 79% 65%

Prior arrest record without FTA 59 62*

Prior arrest record with FTA 50 58*

Most serious prior conviction

No prior convictions (reference) 77% 70%

Misdemeanor 63 64**

Felony 46 51**

Note: Logistic regression (predicted probability) results exclude the 

year 1990 because of missing data. Asterisks indicate category differed from the reference category at one of the following significance levels: *<=.05, **<=.01. Not all variables in the model are 

shown. See Methodology on page 11 for more information. 
Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts 7

About 1 in 5 detained defendants eventually had their 

case dismissed or were acquitted

Sixty percent of released defendants were eventually convicted — 46% of a felony and 14% of a misdemeanor (table 

5). Conviction rates were higher for detained defendants, 

with 78% convicted, including 69% of a felony. 

On average, released defendants waited nearly 3 times 

longer than detainees for case adjudication 

Released defendants waited a median of 127 days from 

time of arrest until adjudication, nearly 3 times as long as 

those who were detained (45 days). For those released, 

the average time from release to adjudication was nearly 1 

month longer for those on financial release (125 days) than 

for those released under non-financial conditions (101 

days) (table 6). By specific release type, defendants 

released on recognizance had the shortest wait (98 days), 

while those released on property bond had the longest (140 

days). 

Incidents of pretrial misconduct increased with length 

of time in release status

The number of defendants charged with pretrial misconduct increased with the length of time spent in a release 

status. About a third (32%) of failure-to-appear bench warrants were issued within a month of release and about twothirds (68%) within 3 months. The pattern was similar for 

rearrests, with 29% occurring within 1 month of release and 

62% within 3 months.

A third of released defendants were charged with 

pretrial misconduct within 1 year after release

From 1990 through 2004, 33% of defendants were charged 

with committing one or more types of misconduct after 

being released but prior to the disposition of their case (figure 4). A bench warrant for failure to appear in court was 

issued for 23% of released defendants. An estimated 17% 

were arrested for a new offense, including 11% for a felony. 

Cumulative percent of pretrial misconduct

occurring within — 

1 week 1 month 3 months 6 months

Any type 9% 32% 67% 88%

Failure to appear 9 32 68 89

Rearrest 8 29 62 85

Table 5. Adjudication outcomes for released and detained 

State court felony defendants in the 75 largest counties, 

1990-2004

Released 

defendants

Detained 

defendants

Adjudication outcome

Convicted 60% 78%

Felony 46 69

Misdemeanor 14 9

Not convicted 40% 22%

Dismissal/acquittal 31 19

Other outcome 9 2

Median number of days from 

arrest to adjudication 127 days 45 days

Note: Detail may not add to total because of rounding.

Table 6. Time from pretrial release until adjudication of 

State court felony defendants in the 75 largest counties, 

1990-2004

Average time

Type of release Mean Median 

All types 112 days 90 days

Financial releases 125 days 106 days

Surety bond 125 106

Full cash bond 122 100

Deposit bond 126 108

Property bond 140 120

Non-financial releases 101 days 75 days

Recognizance 98 72

Conditional 103 75

Unsecured bond 110 86

Pretrial misconduct rates for State court felony 

defendants in the 75 largest counties, 1990-2004

Figure 4 

Fugitive after 1 year

Felony rearrrest

Rearrest

Failure to appear 

Any type

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Type of pretrial misconduct

Percent of released defendants

committing misconduct within 1

year of release
8 Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts

Pretrial misconduct rates stable from 1990-2004

Overall misconduct rates varied only slightly from 1990 

through 2004, ranging from a high of 35% to a low of 31% 

(figure 5). For failure to appear, the range was from 21% to 

24%, and the fugitive rate ranged from 5% to 8%. Overall 

rearrest rates ranged from 13% to 21%, and felony rearrest 

rates from 10% to 13%.

Pretrial misconduct rates highest for emergency 

releases

About half (52%) of the 1% of defendants released under 

an emergency order to relieve jail crowding were charged 

with some type of misconduct (table 7). Pretrial misconduct 

rates for other types of releases ranged from 27% to 36%. 

After emergency release (45%), the highest failure-toappear rate was for defendants released on unsecured 

bond (30%). Property bond (14%), which also accounted 

for just 1% of releases, had the lowest failure-to-appear 

rate followed by surety bond (18%). 

About 1 in 4 defendants who failed to appear in court 

were fugitives at end of a 1-year study period

By type of release, the percent of the defendants who were 

fugitives after 1 year ranged from 10% for unsecured bond 

releases to 3% of those released on surety bond. 

Overall, 28% of the defendants who failed to appear in 

court and had a bench warrant issued for their arrest were 

still fugitives at the end of a 1-year study period. This was 

6% of all defendants released pretrial (not shown in table). 

Compared to the overall average, the percentage of 

absconded defendants who remained a fugitive was lower 

for surety bond releases (19%).

Likelihood of pretrial misconduct lower for defendants 

released after being charged with murder or rape

Defendants released after being charged with murder 

(19%) or rape (18%) had misconduct rates that were about 

half that for defendants charged with motor vehicle theft 

(39%), drug trafficking (39%), or burglary (37%). 

Younger, male, black, and Hispanic defendants more 

likely to be charged with pretrial misconduct 

Released defendants age 20 or younger (33%) had higher 

misconduct rates than those age 40 or older (28%). This 

pattern also existed for rearrest and failure-to-appear rates. 

Male defendants (34%) had a higher misconduct rate than 

females (28%). Black (36%) and Hispanic (34%) defendants had a higher misconduct rate than whites (28%). 

Prior criminal activity associated with greater 

probability of pretrial misconduct 

Defendants who had an active criminal justice status at the 

time of arrest — such as pretrial release (48%), parole 

(47%), or probation (44%) — had a higher misconduct rate 

than those who were not on a criminal justice status (27%). 

This difference was observed for both failure to appear and 

rearrest. 

Defendants with a prior failure to appear (49%) had a 

higher misconduct rate than defendants who had previously made all court appearances (30%) or had never been 

arrested (23%). Defendants with a prior failure to appear 

(35%) were about twice as likely to have a bench warrant 

issued for failing to appear during the current case than 

other defendants (18%). 

Defendants with at least one prior felony conviction (43%) 

had a higher rate of pretrial misconduct than defendants 

with misdemeanor convictions only (34%) or no prior convictions (27%). 

Type of release

Number of 

defendants 

failing to appear 

Percent 

still a fugitive 

after 1 year

All types 54,485 28%

Surety bond 13,411 19%

Emergency 1,168 22

Conditional 6,788 27

Property bond 490 30

Recognizance 20,883 30

Deposit 4,548 31

Unsecured bond 5,018 33

Full cash bond 2,179 36

Pretrial misconduct rates for State court felony 

defendants in the 75 largest counties, 1990-2004

Figure 5 

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

Percent of released defendants

Misconduct, any type

Failure to appear

Felony rearrest

Fugitive after 1 year

Rearrest, any type
Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts 9

Table 7. State court felony defendants in the 75 largest counties charged with

pretrial misconduct, 1990-2004

Percent of released defendants 

charged with pretrial misconduct 

Variable

Number of 

defendants Any type Rearrest

Failure to 

appear Fugitive 

Type of pretrial release

Release on recognizance 80,865 34% 17% 26% 8%

Surety bond 78,023 29 16 18 3

Conditional release 31,162 32 15 22 6

Deposit bond 20,993 30 14 22 7

Unsecured bond 17,001 36 14 30 10

Full cash bond 11,190 30 15 20 7

Property bond 3,649 27 17 14 4

Emergency release 2,656 52 17 45 10

Most serious arrest charge

Murder 741 19% 12% 9% 1%

Rape 3,481 18 9 10 2

Robbery 12,947 35 21 21 6

Assault 32,931 23 12 14 4

Burglary 18,377 37 19 25 6

Larceny/theft 26,667 33 16 25 7

Motor vehicle theft 6,415 39 20 29 7

Forgery 8,374 33 15 24 7

Fraud 9,094 21 8 15 5

Drug trafficking 47,182 39 21 27 8

Other drug 50,547 37 18 29 8

Weapons 8,574 27 13 17 5

Driving-related 8,148 28 14 18 5

Age at arrest

20 or younger 55,505 33% 20% 21% 5%

21-29 90,768 34 17 24 7

30-39 71,049 33 16 24 7

40 or older 44,701 28 13 20 6

Gender 

Male 211,396 34% 18% 23% 6%

Female 52,291 28 12 21 6

Race/Hispanic origin 

Black, non-Hispanic 96,348 36% 19% 25% 7%

White, non-Hispanic 64,571 28 14 19 4

Hispanic, any race 49,544 34 17 25 8

Other, non-Hispanic 5,165 23 13 14 3

Criminal justice status at arrest 

On parole 6,012 47% 25% 32% 7%

On probation 25,765 44 26 30 6

Released pending prior case 25,955 48 30 30 7

No active status 167,227 27 12 19 6

Prior arrests and FTA history

Prior arrest record with FTA 59,468 49% 27% 35% 8%

Prior arrest record, no FTA 75,806 30 17 18 5

No prior arrests 85,366 23 8 18 7

Most serious prior conviction

Felony 75,187 43% 25% 28% 6%

Misdemeanor 44,989 34 19 23 5

No prior convictions 129,975 27 12 19 7
10 Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts

Logistic regression analysis of pretrial misconduct

Logistic regression was used to assess the impact of given 

characteristics independent of other factors on the probability of a released defendant being charged with pretrial 

misconduct. The predicted probabilities generated from 

these analyses are presented in the adjacent table. (See 

Methodology for more information on logistic regression).

Type of release

Predicted overall misconduct rates were higher for unsecured bond (42%) and emergency (56%) releases. This 

was also the case for rearrest and failure to appear rates. 

Property (17%), surety (20%), deposit (20%), and full cash 

(20%) bonds all had lower predicted failure-to-appear 

rates than recognizance (24%). The percent of released 

defendants predicted to be fugitives after 1 year was lowest for property (3%) and surety bonds (4%). Emergency 

release and property bonds each accounted for 1% of all 

releases, compared to about 30% each for surety bonds 

and recognizance. (See table 7 for the number of defendants accounted for by each type of pretrial release).

Arrest offense

Drug trafficking defendants (38%) had higher predicted 

rates of overall misconduct, rearrest and failure-to-appear 

than defendants charged with murder (19%), rape (21%), 

assault (26%), fraud (29%), or a weapons offense (31%). 

Demographic characteristics

Defendants age 20 or younger (39%) had a higher predicted misconduct rate than those ages 21 to 39 (35%) 

or age 40 or older (30%). This pattern held for rearrest, 

but for court appearance record only defendants age 40 

or older were predicted to perform better than those under 

age 21.

Male defendants (35%) were predicted to have a higher 

misconduct rate than females (32%). Hispanic (37%) and 

black (36%) defendants were predicted to be charged with 

misconduct more often than whites (32%). This difference 

also existed for failure to appear, but not rearrest.

Criminal history

Defendants with an active criminal justice status at the 

time of arrest, such as parole (42%), probation (39%), or 

pretrial release (42%), had higher predicted misconduct 

rates than those without such a status (33%). This difference was observed for both failure to appear and rearrest. 

Compared to those without prior arrests (29%), defendants 

with an arrest record were predicted to be charged with 

misconduct more often, especially if they had previously 

failed to appear in court (47%). This pattern was observed 

for both failure to appear and rearrest. Defendants with 

prior felony convictions (39%) had a higher predicted misconduct rate than other defendants (33%). This pattern 

also existed for rearrest, but not failure to appear.

Predicted probability of being charged 

with pretrial misconduct

Variable Any type Rearrest

Failure to 

appear Fugitive 

Type of pretrial release

Recognizance (reference) 34% 17% 24% 6%

Surety bond 33 19 20** 4**

Conditional release 37 18 24 6

Deposit bond 32 18 20* 5

Unsecured bond 42** 21* 28* 8

Full cash bond 34 19 20* 6

Property bond 31 18 17** 3**

Emergency release 56** 26** 39* 8

Most serious arrest charge

Drug trafficking (reference) 38% 20% 24% 6%

Murder 19** 11* 8** /

Rape 21** 11** 10** 2**

Robbery 32** 18 19** 5

Assault 26** 15** 14** 3**

Burglary 37 19 23 5*

Larceny/theft 37 19 25 6

Motor Vehicle theft 39 20 27* 5

Forgery 38 19 27 6

Fraud 29** 15** 18** 4**

Other drug 42** 21 29** 7

Weapons 31** 16** 19** 4**

Driving-related 33** 16** 22 6

Age at arrest

20 or younger (reference) 39% 24% 22% 4%

21-29 35** 19** 23 5**

30-39 35** 17** 23 6**

40 or older 30** 14** 20** 5**

Gender

Male (reference) 35% 19% 22% 5%

Female 32** 16** 22 5

Race/Hispanic origin

White, non-Hispanic 

 (reference) 32% 18% 20% 4%

Black, non-Hispanic 36** 19 23** 5**

Other, non-Hispanic 27* 16 16* 3

Hispanic, any race 37** 19 25** 7**

Criminal justice status at arrest 

No active status (reference) 33% 17% 21% 5%

Released pending prior case 42** 24** 26** 5

On probation 39** 22** 25** 5

On parole 42** 20 29** 6

Prior arrests and FTA history

No prior arrests (reference) 29% 13% 20% 5%

Prior arrest record with FTA 47** 26** 31** 6*

Prior arrest record, no FTA 33** 20** 19 4**

Most serious prior conviction

No prior convictions

 (reference) 33% 17% 22% 6%

Misdemeanor 33 17 21 4**

Felony 39** 22** 23 4**

Note: Asterisks indicate category differed from reference category at one 

of the following significance levels: *<=.05, **<=.01. Not all variables in 

model are shown. See Methodology on page 11 for more information. 

/Murder defendants were excluded from the fugitive analysis.
Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts 11

Methodology

Data utilized

This report analyzed data from the State Court Processing 

Statistics (SCPS) series, covering felony cases filed in May 

of even-numbered years from 1990 through 2004. SCPS is 

a biennial data collection series that examines felony cases 

processed in a sample of 40 of the Nation’s 75 most populous counties. The counties included in the sample have 

varied over time to account for changing national population patterns. For a year-by-year summary of the counties 

participating in SCPS, see Appendix table 1. For more 

information on the SCPS methodology see the BJS report 

Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 2002 at http://

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/fdluc02.htm>.

Each SCPS data collection tracks approximately 15,000 

felony cases for up to one year, with the exception of murder defendants who are followed for up to two years. In 

addition to defendant demographic characteristics and 

criminal history, SCPS also obtains data on a variety of felony case processing factors, including the types of arrest 

charges filed, conditions of pretrial release such as bail 

amount and type of release, and instances of pretrial misconduct including failure to appear in court, rearrest while 

on pretrial release, and other violations that resulted in the 

revocation of release. Adjudication and sentencing outcomes are also recorded. 

Using multivariate statistical techniques 

This report analyzes pretrial release and misconduct 

through both bivariate and multivariate statistical techniques. While the bivariate statistics provide a descriptive 

overview of pretrial release and misconduct among felony 

defendants in the 75 most populous counties, multivariate 

analysis can help disentangle the impacts that independent 

variables such as demographic characteristics, prior criminal history, severity of arrest charges, and release type 

have on dependent variables such as the probability of pretrial release and misconduct. Logistic regression models 

were used to estimate the probability of pretrial release and 

misconduct. This is one widely accepted method for analyzing the effects of multiple independent factors on dichotomous or binomial outcomes. 

The regression analyses excluded data from 1990 because 

of the large number of cases missing data on race or Hispanic origin. The regression models also excluded cases 

that had missing data on either the independent or dependent variables. This resulted in reductions in the number of 

cases analyzed. From 1992 through 2004, 99,899 felony 

defendants were either released or detained, but when 

missing data were excluded from the regression models, 

the number of cases analyzed declined to 71,027. 

To determine the impact of missing data, logistic regression 

models excluded certain independent factors to increase 

the number of analyzed cases. Since the results from these 

analyses did not differ appreciably from the full model, 

missing data did not affect the results. 

SCPS data are drawn from a sample and weighted to represent cases processed in the 75 most populous counties 

during the month of May. When the regressions used these 

weighted data, the large number of weighted cases 

resulted in statistical significance for nearly all the variables 

in the model. Effect weighting was employed to address 

this issue. Through effect weighting, the SCPS data were 

weighted to the number of cases actually sampled rather 

than the number of cases in the universe represented by 

the sample.

Generalized estimating equation techniques

One primary assumption of binary logistic regression is that 

all observations in the dataset are independent. This 

assumption is not necessarily appropriate for the SCPS 

series because the data are collected on a county basis. 

The county-based nature of SCPS creates a presumption 

of clustered data. In clustered datasets, “the data can be 

grouped into natural or imposed clusters with observations 

in the same clusters tending to be more alike than observations in different clusters.”*

 The clustered nature of the 

SCPS data was handled by utilizing generalized estimating 

equation (GEE) techniques. Logistic regression modeling 

with generalized estimating equation (GEE) techniques 

provides for more efficient computation of regression coefficients and more robust standard error estimates.

Interpreting logistic regression probabilities

Logistic regression produces nonlinear estimations for 

each independent variable that can be difficult to interpret. 

In this report, the logistic regression coefficients are made 

interpretable by transforming them into predicted probabilities (see table 4 and box on page 10). The predicted probabilities were calculated by setting all independent variables 

to their mean levels, setting the independent variable of 

interest to a value of one, multiplying the means of each 

independent variable by their respective logistic regression 

parameter estimates, taking the exponential function of the 

summed product of means and parameter estimates, and 

then calculating the probability of that exponential function. 

Limitations of models

The logistic regression analyses were limited and intended 

to reflect the effects of only selected factors that were available in the SCPS data. Other factors could potentially be 

related to pretrial release and misconduct. Examples of 

these include: defendants’ residence, employment status, 

community ties, mental health status, and substance 

abuse. If data on these variables were available, the logistic regression results could be altered.

*Paul D. Allison, 2001. Logistic Regression Using the SAS System: 

Theory and Application, Cary, N.C.: SAS Institute Inc., page 179. 
U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Statistics

Washington, DC 20531

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/BJS

Permit No. G-91

*NCJ~212749*

12 Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts

The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical 

agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jeffrey L. 

Sedgwick is the director.

This Special Report was written by Thomas H. 

Cohen, Ph.D., and Brian A. Reaves, Ph.D. William 

J. Sabol, Ph.D. provided technical assistance. 

Tracey Kyckelhahn provided verification. Tina 

Dorsey produced and edited the report, under the 

supervision of Doris J. James. Jayne Robinson 

prepared the report for final printing.

November 2007, NCJ 214994

This report in portable document format and in 

ASCII and its related statistical data and tables 

are available at the BJS World Wide Web 

Internet site: <http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/

abstract/prfdsc.htm>.

Office of Justice Programs

Innovation • Partnerships • Safer Neighborhoods

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Additional sources on bail and pretrial release include:

Demuth, Stephen, “Racial and Ethnic Differences in Pretrial Release Outcomes: A Comparison of Hispanic, 

Black, and White Felony Arrestees.” Criminology: 41(3): 

873 (2003).

Feeley, Malcolm M., “Bail Reform,” chap. 2 in Court 

Reform on Trial: Why Simple Solutions Fail (New York, 

NY: Basic Books, Inc., 1983, pp. 40-79).

Goldkamp, John, “Danger and Detention: A Second Generation of Bail Reform.” Journal of Criminal Law and 

Criminology: 76:1 (1985).

Helland, Eric and Alexander Tabarrok, “Public versus Private Law Enforcement: Evidence from Bail Jumping.” 

Journal of Law and Economics: (47): pp. 93-122 (2004).

Kennedy, Spurgeon and D. Alan Henry. Commercial 

Surety Bail: Assessing Its Role in the Pretrial Release 

and Detention Decision <http://www.pretrial.org/publications.html> (1996).

Watson, Jerry W. and L. Jay Labe, “Bail Bonds,” chap. 8 

in The Law of Miscellaneous and Commercial Surety 

Bonds, Chicago, IL: American Bar Association, 2001, pp. 

127-142.
Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts 13

Appendix table 1. State Court Processing Statistics, participating jurisdictions, 1990-2004

County 

or equivalent

Number of cases Year of participation

Unweighted Weighted 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004

Jefferson (AL) 1,517 6,612    

Maricopa (AZ) 4,245 13,848       

Pima (AZ) 2,655 7,588    

Alameda (CA) 1,941 8,471    

Contra Costa (CA) 817 2,043    

Los Angeles (CA) 10,419 41,676       

Orange (CA) 2,984 9,964    

Riverside (CA) 1,646 5,926 

Sacramento (CA) 1,898 6,786    

San Bernardino (CA) 3,061 9,909       

San Diego (CA) 1,529 6,604    

San Francisco (CA) 1,327 5,675   

San Mateo (CA) 526 1,315 

Santa Clara (CA) 2,840 9,552       

Ventura (CA) 576 1,901  

New Haven (CT) 238 1,047 

Washington (DC) 263 1,315  

Broward (FL) 2,155 7,095       

Duval (FL) 387 1,935    

Miami-Dade (FL) 4,355 17,420    

Hillsborough (FL) 1,415 4,515    

Orange (FL) 1,367 5,938  

Palm Beach (FL) 1,154 4,255    

Pinellas (FL) 1,687 6,290    

Fulton (GA) 1,748 6,992     

Honolulu (HI) 890 2,692     

Cook (IL) 5,738 22,952       

DuPage (IL) 463 1,528  

Marion (IN) 2,878 9,908   

Jefferson (KY) 310 1,240  

Essex (MA) 546 2,004  

Middlesex (MA) 657 2,168 

Suffolk (MA) 1,546 5,753    

Baltimore (MD) 1,006 2,515 

Baltimore (city) (MD) 1,542 4,108  

Montgomery (MD) 1,216 3,494    

Macomb (MI) 644 1,610 

Wayne (MI) 2,030 8,120       

Jackson (MO) 999 3,297  

St. Louis (MO) 1,582 5,447    

Essex (NJ) 2,636 11,947     

Bronx (NY) 3,713 15,404       

Erie (NY) 1,048 4,134    

Kings (NY) 3,893 15,988       

Monroe (NY) 1,124 3,874    

Nassau (NY) 772 1,930 

New York (NY) 2,801 11,204    

Queens (NY) 2,058 7,943     

Suffolk (NY) 778 2,567  

Westchester (NY) 980 2,450 

Franklin (OH) 618 2,719 

Hamilton (OH) 1,188 4,970    

Allegheny (PA) 502 1,516    

Montgomery (PA) 567 2,225   

Philadelphia (PA) 4,043 15,952       

Shelby (TN) 2,837 11,332       

Dallas (TX) 2,169 8,676       

El Paso (TX) 949 2,373 

Harris (TX) 3,661 14,644       

Tarrant (TX) 1,526 6,941    

Travis (TX) 660 2,904 

Salt Lake (UT) 1,212 4,981    

Fairfax (VA) 1,158 4,670    

King (WA) 1,324 5,591    

MiIwaukee (WI) 1,542 5,161   
14 Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts

Appendix table 2. Logistic regression analysis of pretrial release decision 

Variable Mean Estimate Standard error

Most serious arrest charge

Murder 0.0084 -2.6575** 0.2412

Rape 0.0142 -0.7846** 0.1173

Robbery 0.0588 -1.1088** 0.1004

Assault 0.1222 -0.1821* 0.0785

Other violent 0.0401 -0.1755 0.1173

Burglary 0.0870 -0.5562** 0.0817

Larceny 0.0888 0.1313 0.0805

Motor vehicle theft 0.0342 -0.5281** 0.0997

Forgery 0.0279 0.1781 0.1052

Fraud 0.0274 0.6323** 0.1660

Other property 0.0411 0.3007 0.1655

Other drug 0.1995 0.3023* 0.1384

Weapons 0.0272 0.1001 0.1074

Driving-related 0.0276 0.6147** 0.1306

Other public order 0.0294 0.0926 0.1332

Age at arrest

21-29 0.3423 -0.0544 0.0357

30-39 0.2871 -0.1700** 0.0451

40 or older 0.1884 -0.1713** 0.0456

Gender 

Female 0.1735 0.4031** 0.0393

Race/Hispanic origin 

Black, non-Hispanic 0.4456 -0.1274 0.0690

Other, non-Hispanic 0.0229 -0.1592* 0.0734

Hispanic, any race 0.2432 -0.6488** 0.1122

Criminal justice status at arrest

Other status 0.0283 -0.9417** 0.1509

Released pending prior case 0.1057 -0.1758 0.1325

On probation 0.1605 -0.7471** 0.0686

On parole 0.0610 -1.2450** 0.1671

Prior arrest and FTA history

Prior arrest record with FTA 0.3050 -0.3144* 0.1468

Prior arrest record, no FTA 0.4205 -0.1597* 0.0749

Most serious prior conviction

Felony 0.4156 -0.8396** 0.0756

Misdemeanor 0.1746 -0.2886** 0.0847

Study year

1992 0.0940 0.2602 0.1513

1994 0.1212 0.1664 0.1515

1996 0.1332 0.3148* 0.1512

1998 0.1276 0.1924 0.1475

2000 0.1731 0.1250 0.1190

2002 0.1795 0.1576 0.1069

Intercept 1.0000 1.4226 0.1652

Number of observations 71,027

Log likelihood -41377.1132

Note: Logistic regression figures derived from generalized estimating equation (GEE) 

methods. GEE logistic regression procedures were an appropriate technique 

because of the clustered nature of the felony case processing data. The regression 

estimates were transformed into predicted probabilities in the report by setting all 

independent variables at their mean levels, setting the independent variable of interest to a value of one, and then calculating the probability of the dependent measure 

outcome for that particular independent variable. Asterisks indicate category difference from the reference category at one of the following significance levels:*>=.05, 

**>=.01.
Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts 15

Appendix table 3. Logistic regression analysis of pretrial misconduct

Variable Mean Estimate Standard error

Most serious arrest charge

Murder 0.0019 -0.9339** 0.2569

Rape 0.0118 -0.8203** 0.1123

Robbery 0.0329 -0.2552** 0.0930

Assault 0.1212 -0.5577** 0.0584

Other violent 0.0414 -0.5564** 0.0829

Burglary 0.0684 -0.0368 0.0745

Larceny 0.0985 -0.0148 0.0585

Motor vehicle theft 0.0270 0.0616 0.0888

Forgery 0.0318 0.0264 0.0884

Fraud 0.0373 -0.3690** 0.1076

Other property 0.0472 -0.1442* 0.0624

Other drug 0.2255 0.1666** 0.0544

Weapons 0.0273 -0.2932** 0.0635

Driving-related 0.0327 -0.1878** 0.0694

Other public order 0.0290 -0.4768** 0.1095

Age at arrest

21-29 0.3403 -0.1352** 0.0251

30-39 0.2737 -0.1736** 0.0428

40 or older 0.1865 -0.3842** 0.0399

Gender

Female 0.2148 -0.1258** 0.0390

Race/Hispanic origin

Black, non-Hispanic 0.4449 0.1695** 0.0317

Other, non-Hispanic 0.0238 -0.2248* 0.0897

Hispanic, any race 0.2021 0.2163** 0.0334

Criminal justice status at arrest

Other status 0.0177 0.1061 0.1047

Released pending prior case 0.0943 0.4042** 0.0561

On probation 0.1105 0.2764** 0.0475

On parole 0.0239 0.3778** 0.1046

Prior arrest and FTA history

Prior arrest record with FTA 0.2371 0.7565** 0.0540

Prior arrest record, no FTA 0.4111 0.1756** 0.0438

Most serious prior conviction

Felony 0.3034 0.2417** 0.0496

Misdemeanor 0.1807 -0.0071 0.0482

Type of pretrial release

Surety bond 0.3714 -0.0570 0.0682

Full cash bond 0.0352 -0.0408 0.1078

Deposit bond 0.0957 -0.0963 0.1114

Property bond 0.0118 -0.1435 0.1249

Conditional release 0.1443 0.1107 0.0850

Unsecured bond 0.0647 0.3188** 0.1036

Emergency release 0.0105 0.8663** 0.1830

Study year

1992 0.1007 -0.2136 0.1483

1994 0.1199 -0.1810 0.1237

1996 0.1378 -0.2908 0.1746

1998 0.1171 -0.3394* 0.1588

2000 0.1797 -0.2050 0.1332

2002 0.1828 -0.1417 0.1146

Intercept 1.0000 -0.6608 0.1264

Number of observations 40,179

Log likelihood -23469.1617

Note. See note on appendix table 2. Asterisks indicate category difference from the

reference category at one of the following significance levels:*>=.05, **>=.01.
16 Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts

Appendix table 4. Logistic regression analysis of pretrial rearrest for new offense 

Variable Mean Estimate Standard error

Most serious arrest charge

Murder 0.0018 -0.7451* 0.3078

Rape 0.0119 -0.7720** 0.1070

Robbery 0.0329 -0.1737 0.0987

Assault 0.1215 -0.3368** 0.0670

Other violent 0.0415 -0.3810** 0.0955

Burglary 0.0685 -0.0593 0.0708

Larceny 0.0986 -0.0569 0.0584

Motor vehicle theft 0.0270 -0.0229 0.0790

Forgery 0.0320 -0.1010 0.0875

Fraud 0.0377 -0.3578** 0.1238

Other property 0.0471 -0.1260 0.0752

Other drug 0.2233 0.0585 0.0604

Weapons 0.0275 -0.3018** 0.1159

Driving-related 0.0329 -0.3122** 0.0842

Other public order 0.0292 -0.3861** 0.0949

Age at arrest

21-29 0.3407 -0.3505** 0.0338

30-39 0.2731 -0.4504** 0.0399

40 or older 0.1870 -0.6585** 0.0472

Gender 

Female 0.2155 -0.2279** 0.0344

Race/Hispanic origin

Black, non-Hispanic 0.4468 0.0653 0.0430

Other, non-Hispanic 0.0238 -0.1297 0.1010

Hispanic, any race 0.1999 0.0705 0.0468

Criminal justice status at arrest

Other status 0.0177 0.2058* 0.0979

Released pending prior case 0.0953 0.4476** 0.0485

On probation 0.1099 0.3147** 0.0501

On parole 0.0240 0.1713 0.1054

Prior arrest and FTA history

Prior arrest record with FTA 0.2370 0.8455** 0.0701

Prior arrest record, no FTA 0.4136 0.4895** 0.0578

Most serious prior conviction

Felony 0.3049 0.3581** 0.0617

Misdemeanor 0.1807 0.0471 0.0552

Type of pretrial release

Surety bond 0.3747 0.1077 0.0611

Full cash bond 0.0350 0.0991 0.1273

Deposit bond 0.0969 0.0600 0.1089

Property bond 0.0119 0.0404 0.1462

Conditional release 0.1453 0.0640 0.0842

Unsecured bond 0.0655 0.2473* 0.1160

Emergency release 0.0104 0.5156** 0.1371

Study year

1992 0.0981 -0.5280** 0.1859

1994 0.1145 -0.3974 0.2419

1996 0.1378 -0.4183 0.2615

1998 0.1152 -0.4412* 0.1998

2000 0.1836 -0.3840** 0.1466

2002

0.1866 -0.2230 0.1244

Intercept 1.0000 -1.3631 0.1478

Number of observations

39,209

Log Likelihood -15735.4776

Note. See not on appendix table 2. Asterisks indicate category difference from the 

reference category at one of the following significance levels:*>=.05, **>=.01.
Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts 17

 Appendix table 5. Logistic regression analysis of pretrial failure to appear

Variable Mean Estimate Standard error

Most serious arrest charge

Murder 0.0019 -1.3123** 0.3566

Rape 0.0118 -1.0242** 0.1934

Robbery 0.0329 -0.2917** 0.0810

Assault 0.1212 -0.6787** 0.0599

Other violent 0.0413 -0.7196** 0.0721

Burglary 0.0683 -0.0595 0.0690

Larceny 0.0987 0.0527 0.0667

Motor vehicle theft 0.0271 0.1741* 0.0895

Forgery 0.0319 0.1358 0.0897

Fraud 0.0374 -0.3719** 0.1115

Other property 0.0471 -0.0572 0.0756

Other drug 0.2245 0.2330** 0.0586

Weapons 0.0275 -0.2747** 0.0660

Driving-related 0.0328 -0.0964 0.0710

Other public order 0.0289 -0.4888** 0.1249

Age at arrest

21-29 0.3404 0.0299 0.0296

30-39 0.2737 0.0363 0.0471

40 or older 0.1869 -0.1253** 0.0415

Gender 

Female 0.2150 -0.0300 0.0380

Race/Hispanic origin 

Black, non-Hispanic 0.4450 0.2006** 0.0377

Other, non-Hispanic 0.0238 -0.2509* 0.1023

Hispanic, any race 0.2019 0.2970** 0.0459

Criminal justice status at arrest

Other status 0.0177 0.0778 0.1026

Released pending prior case 0.0947 0.2711** 0.0570

On probation 0.1103 0.2347** 0.0556

On parole 0.0238 0.4306** 0.1076

Prior arrest and FTA history

Prior arrest record with FTA 0.2376 0.5902** 0.0646

Prior arrest record, no FTA 0.4106 -0.0505 0.0458

Most serious prior conviction

Felony 0.3036 0.0494 0.0603

Misdemeanor 0.1805 -0.0439 0.0414

Type of pretrial release

Surety bond 0.3712 -0.2713** 0.0890

Full cash bond 0.0353 -0.2444* 0.1047

Deposit bond 0.0962 -0.2307* 0.1193

Property bond 0.0117 -0.4271** 0.1499

Conditional release 0.1447 -0.0119 0.0958

Unsecured bond 0.0650 0.2051* 0.1063

Emergency release 0.0106 0.6762* 0.2823

Study year

1992 0.1003 0.0228 0.0958

1994 0.1202 -0.0754 0.0906

1996 0.1356 -0.0846 0.0849

1998 0.1180 -0.0251 0.0864

2000 0.1801 -0.0041 0.0903

2002 0.1836 0.0413 0.1050

Intercept 1.0000 -1.3378 0.1278

Number of observations 39,838

Log likelihood -19756.0265

Note. See not on appendix table 2. Asterisks indicate category difference from the reference 

category at one of the following significance levels:*>=.05, **>=.01.
18 Pretrial Release of Felony Defendants in State Courts

Appendix table 6. Logistic regression analysis of pretrial fugitive status 

Variable Mean Estimate Standard error

Most serious arrest charge

Rape 0.0118 -1.2836** 0.2824

Robbery 0.0330 -0.3058 0.1690

Assault 0.1215 -0.8666** 0.1170

Other violent 0.0414 -0.8022** 0.1352

Burglary 0.0684 -0.2789* 0.1133

Larceny 0.0988 0.0044 0.0817

Motor vehicle theft 0.0271 -0.2829 0.1506

Forgery 0.0320 -0.1446 0.1210

Fraud 0.0375 -0.5742** 0.2041

Other property 0.0471 -0.2003 0.1418

Other drug 0.2250 0.0861 0.1021

Weapons 0.0275 -0.3852** 0.1358

Driving - related 0.0329 -0.0587 0.1268

Other public order 0.0289 -0.6688** 0.1355

Age at arrest

21-29 0.3404 0.3634** 0.0685

30-39 0.2739 0.3892** 0.0556

40 or older 0.1870 0.2437** 0.0700

Gender 

Female 0.2153 -0.1027 0.0717

Race/Hispanic origin 

Black, non-Hispanic 0.4449 0.2836** 0.0767

Other, non-Hispanic 0.0238 -0.1648 0.1917

Hispanic, any race 0.2020 0.6593** 0.0905

Criminal justice status at arrest

Other status 0.0177 0.0222 0.1925

Released pending prior case 0.0949 0.0150 0.0744

On probation 0.1103 0.0332 0.0738

On parole 0.0236 0.2334 0.1520

Prior arrest and FTA history

Prior arrest record with FTA 0.2379 0.1558* 0.0732

Prior arrest record, no FTA 0.4104 -0.3075** 0.0742

Most serious prior conviction

Felony 0.3037 -0.2730** 0.1049

Misdemeanor 0.1806 -0.2527** 0.0663

Type of pretrial release

Surety bond 0.3710 -0.6047** 0.1126

Full cash bond 0.0353 -0.0503 0.1600

Deposit bond 0.0962 -0.3515 0.3069

Property bond 0.0116 -0.7676** 0.2294

Conditional release 0.1448 -0.0633 0.1156

Unsecured bond 0.0650 0.1997 0.1726

Emergency release 0.0106 0.2469 0.2407

Study year

1992 0.1002 0.3370** 0.1208

1994 0.1201 0.1748 0.1116

1996 0.1357 0.1633 0.0965

1998 0.1180 0.2129 0.1388

2000 0.1802 0.2684** 0.0908

2002 0.1835 0.1906 0.1112

Intercept 1.0000 -2.9223 0.1845

Number of observations 39,752

Log Likelihood -8391.7631

Note. See not on appendix table 2. Asterisks indicate category difference from the 

reference category at one of the following significance levels:*>=.05, **>=.01.