DOI: 10.3886/icpsr04533.v1
title: Race and the Decision to Seek the Death Penalty in Federal Cases, 1995-2000 [United States]
title: Version 1

description: The purpose of this project was to examine possible
 defendant and victim race effects in capital decisions in the federal
 system. Per the terms of their grant, the researchers selected cases
 that were handled under the revised Death Penalty Protocol of 1995 and
 were processed during Attorney General Janet Reno's term in office.
 The researchers began the project by examining a sample of Department
 of Justice Capital Case Unit (CCU) case files. These files contained
 documents submitted by the United States Attorney's Office (USAO), a
 copy of the indictment, a copy of the Attorney General's Review
 Committee on Capital Cases (AGRC's) draft and final memorandum to the
 Attorney General (AG), and a copy of the AG's decision letter. Next,
 they created a list of the types of data that would be feasible and
 desirable to collect and constructed a case abstraction form and
 coding rules for recording data on victims, defendants, and case
 characteristics from the CCU's hard-copy case files. The record
 abstractors did not have access to information about defendant or
 victim gender or race. Victim and defendant race and gender data were
 obtained from the CCU's electronic files. Five specially trained
 coders used the case abstraction forms to record and enter salient
 information in the CCU hard-copy files into a database. Coders worked
 on only one case at a time. The resulting database contains 312 cases
 for which defendant- and victim-race data were available for the 94
 federal judicial districts. These cases were received by the CCU
 between January 1, 1995 and July 31, 2000, and for which the AG at the
 time had made a decision about whether to seek the death penalty prior
 to December 31, 2000. The 312 cases includes a total of 652 defendants
 (see SAMPLING for cases not included). The AG made a seek/not-seek
 decision for 600 of the defendants, with the difference between the
 counts stemming mainly from defendants pleading guilty prior to the AG
 making a charging decision. The database was structured to allow
 researchers to examine two stages in the federal prosecution process,
 namely the USAO recommendation to seek or not to seek the death
 penalty and the final AG charging decision. Finally, dispositions
 (e.g., sentence imposed) were obtained for all but 12 of the
 defendants in the database. Variables include data about the
 defendants and victims such as age, gender, race/ethnicity,
 employment, education, marital status, and the relationship between
 the defendant and victim. Data are provided on the defendant's
 citizenship (United States citizen, not United States citizen), place
 of birth (United States born, foreign born), offense dates, statute
 code, counts for the ten most serious offenses committed, defendant
 histories of alcohol abuse, drug abuse, mental illness, physical or
 sexual abuse as a child, serious head injury, intelligence (IQ), or
 other claims made in the case. Information is included for up to 13
 USAO assessments and 13 AGRC assessments of statutory and
 non-statutory aggravating factors and mitigating factors. Victim
 characteristics included living situation and other reported factors,
 such as being a good citizen, attending school, past abuse by the
 defendant, gross size difference between the victim and defendant, if
 the victim was pregnant, if the victim had a physical handicap, mental
 or emotional problems or developmental disability, and the victim's
 present or former status (e.g., police informant, prison inmate, law
 enforment officer). Data are also provided for up to 13 factors each
 regarding the place and nature of the killing, defendant motive,
 coperpetrators, weapons, injuries, witnesses, and forensic and other
evidence.
description: The purpose of this project was to examine
 possible defendant and victim race effects in capital decisions in the
 federal system. Per the terms of their grant, the researchers selected
 cases that were handled under the revised Death Penalty Protocol of
 1995 and were processed during Attorney General Janet Reno's term in
 office. In federal capital cases, the United States Attorney's Office
 (USAO), in the district where the case is prosecuted, makes an initial
 recommendation to seek or not to seek the death penalty for defendants
 who are charged with crimes that carry this penalty. The USAO sends
 this recommendation, a memo describing the basis for it, and usually
 other supporting documentation to the Department of Justice Capital
 Case Unit (CCU). This unit removes information about defendant and
 victim race from these materials and prepares a file for each case. In
 this context, a "case" refers to one or more related incidents or
 crimes and may involve one or more defendants who are accused of
 killing one or more victims. The CCU staff, who also may receive
 information from the defense, review the materials (and possibly
 consult with the USAO who submitted the case) and prepare a summary of
 the case. This summary and the USAO's recommendation is given to the
 Attorney General's Review Committee on Capital Cases (AGRC). The AGRC
 hears from interested parties and occasionally gathers additional
 information about the case, reviews the USAO's recommendation, the
 case file, and the summary material prepared by CCU staff, and makes a
 recommendation to the United States Attorney General (AG) as to
 whether or not the death penalty should be sought for each defendant
 who is charged with committing a capital offense. The AG then makes
 the final decision. The AG informs the USAO by letter of the final
 decision (which almost always conforms to the AGRC's recommendation).
 A copy of this letter is placed in the hard-copy case file. The final
 AG decision also is entered in an electronic database maintained by
 the CCU. This research project examined questions about this process
 in regard to race, predictability, capriciousness, and geographic
 effects by investigating whether USAO recommendations and AG decisions
 to seek the death penalty are related to case characteristics,
 including the geographic location of the USAO prosecuting the case,
 the defendant's race, and whether any of the defendant's victims were
 White. Specific questions about the process include: (1) Are the
 USAO's recommendations and the AG's decisions racially neutral, or are
 they affected by the race of the victim, the race of defendant, or
 both? (2) Are the USAO and AG decisions predictable? (3) Are they
 capricious (e.g., are they rationally related to the facts of the case
 and the law or are they affected by the whims of key decision
makers)?
description: The researchers began the project by examining a
 sample of Department of Justice Capital Case Unit (CCU) case
 files. These files contained documents submitted by the USAO, a copy
 of the indictment, a copy of the AGRC's draft and final memorandum to
 the AG, and a copy of the AG's decision letter. Next, they created a
 list of the types of data that would be feasible and desirable to
 collect and constructed a case abstraction form and coding rules for
 recording data on victims, defendants, and case characteristics from
 the CCU's hard-copy case files. The record abstractors did not have
 access to information about defendant or victim gender or race. Victim
 and defendant race and gender data were obtained from the CCU's
 electronic files. Five specially trained coders (who worked under the
 direction of a field data collection supervisor) used the case
 abstraction forms to record and enter salient information in the CCU
 hard-copy files into a database. Coders worked on only one case at a
 time. As an initial step, the coders inventoried the documents in the
 file and recorded the contents of the case file on the Case Summary
 Form. The form listed the federal district, the case name, defendants
 and victims, the capital-eligible charges, and the CCU database AG
 decision. This form also provided an orientation to the materials in
 the case file and an opportunity to verify or flag cases with a
 different number of parties or AG decision that could then be verified
 by the fieldwork supervisor. Next, they read the indictment, the USAO
 memorandum, and the AG and defense documents. They then began the
 coding process, which included reviewing all the documents and marking
 the sections of them that contained information required to complete
 the different sections of the coding forms. Case files often contained
 different and sometimes conflicting information about an incident. For
 example, Defendant A might claim that he was not at the scene while
 another defendant or a witness claimed that Defendant A pulled the
 trigger. To accommodate the uncertainty about the facts, the
 researchers constructed the coding forms so that both claims were
 captured. Coders were not asked to resolve these discrepancies. For
 quality assurance, approximately one third of each coder's cases were
 validated. This step involved an independent summary review of the
 case file using the AGRC executive summary document and comparing the
 information it contained with that coded in the form. Any
 discrepancies triggered a more thorough review of the case file and
 coding forms. Coders met weekly with their supervisor to review
 problem resolutions, retrain, and further enhance coding consistency
 and accuracy. The resulting database contains 312 cases for which
 defendant- and victim-race data were available for the 94 federal
 judicial districts. These cases, received by the CCU between January
 1, 1995 and July 31, 2000, were those which the AG at the time (Janet
 Reno) had made a decision about whether to seek the death penalty for
 these cases prior to December 31, 2000. The 312 cases include a total
 of 652 defendants (see SAMPLING for cases not included). The AG made a
 seek/not-seek decision for 600 of the defendants, with the difference
 between the counts stemming mainly from defendants pleading guilty
 prior to the AG making a charging decision. The database was
 structured to allow researchers to examine two stages in the federal
 prosecution process, namely the USAO recommendation to seek or not to
 seek the death penalty and the final AG charging decision. Finally,
 dispositions (e.g., sentence imposed) for all but 50 of the defendants
 in the database were obtained from the Public Access to Court
 Electronic Records (PACER) system operated by the Administrative
 Office of the United States Courts. The sentences for 38 of these 50
 cases were located by analysts at the United States Bureau of Justice
 Statistics using data from the Federal Bureau of Prisons' SENTRY
 database, the Executive Office for United States Attorneys' central
 system file, and the Administrative Office of the United States
Courts' criminal master file.
description: Variables include data about the defendants and
 victims such as age, gender, race/ethnicity, employment, education,
 marital status, and the relationship between the defendant and victim
 (stranger, friend, crime partner, parent, sexual rival, rival,
 family). Data are provided on the defendant's citizenship (United
 States citizen, not United States citizen), place of birth (United
 States born, foreign born), offense dates, statute code, and counts
 for the ten most serious offenses committed. Also provided are
 defendant histories of alcohol abuse, drug abuse, mental illness,
 physical or sexual abuse as a child, serious head injury, intelligence
 (IQ), or other claims made in the case. Information is included for up
 to 13 USAO assessments and 13 AGRC assessments of statutory and
 non-statutory aggravating factors (e.g., torture, endangerment of
 others, or victim vulnerability) and mitigating factors (e.g., youth
 of defendant, lack of criminal history, or mental illness or
 retardation). Victim characteristics include living situation and
 other reported factors such as being a good citizen, attending school,
 past abuse by the defendant, gross size difference between the victim
 and defendant, if the victim was pregnant, if the victim had a
 physical handicap, mental or emotional problems or developmental
 disability, and the victim's present or former status (e.g., police
 informant, prison inmate, or law enforcement officer). Data are also
 provided for up to 13 factors, each regarding the place and nature of
 the killing, defendant motive, coperpetrators, weapons, injuries,
witnesses, and forensic and other evidence.
description: none
description: Response Rates: Not applicable.
description: Presence of Common Scales: none
description: This study examined all potential federal capital cases
 submitted by by 94 United States Attorneys' Offices (USAOs) for review
 by the United States Attorney General (AG) between January 1, 1995 and
 July 31, 2000, and which were decided by the AG by December 31,
 2000. The January 1995 start date coincided with the inception of the
 AG's requirement that all death-eligible cases (i.e., not just cases
 with a USAO recommendation to seek the death penalty) be submitted to
 the Attorney General's Review Committee on Capital Cases (AGRC). A
 "case" consisted of one or more defendants whom the USAO charged with
 one or more of the offenses that carry the death penalty, i.e.,
 "capital-eligible" crimes (excluding espionage). The researchers
 eliminated two cases and ten defendants from this population that were
 missing a USAO seek/not-seek recommendation, e.g., because the
 defendant was a fugitive or awaiting extradition from another
 country. This left 315 cases and 657 defendants. Only 297 of these 315
 cases had an AGRC recommendation, largely because some cases were
 settled after the USAO submitted them but before the AGRC made its
 recommendation to the AG (e.g., a plea agreement was accepted in the
 interim). The researchers also eliminated three espionage cases that
 together contained five defendants because these cases could not be
 coded as being White- or nonWhite-victim cases. The researchers
 analyzed the 312 cases involving 652 defendants with a USAO
 seek/not-seek recommendation, and 600 defendants with an AG
 seek/not-seek charging decision (for two of the 600 defendants, the
 USAO was awaiting the outcome of an extradition decision from a
 foreign country to which the defendants had fled.) The AG did not make
 a charging decision for 54 of the defendants whose cases were
 submitted for review by the USAO, usually because there was a guilty
 plea before the AG issued a final death penalty charging decision.
 More than one defendant may be charged with killing a given victim.
 Over half of the cases involved two or more defendants and nearly 80
 percent of the defendants were in multiple-defendant cases. Cases also
 often involved multiple victims. Data include 488 victims. This count
 does not include the roughly 400 victims in the first World Trade
 Center (1993), Oklahoma City, Dar es Salaam, and Nairobi bombings
 because the CCU files did not contain individual-level data for the
victims in these bombings.
description: Datasets: 
DS1: Race and the Decision to Seek the Death Penalty in Federal Cases, 1995-2000 [United States]
description: All capital-eligible cases received by the Attorney
 General's Review Committee on Capital Cases (AGRC) beginning on
January 1, 1995, and decided by December 31, 2000. Smallest Geographic Unit: Federal judicial district
description: record abstractsUsers are encouraged to refer to the final report for
 a full description of the procedures and research strategies used and
 the results obtained in this study. (2) For the time period of this
 study, 71 federal judicial districts and 40 states, the District of
 Columbia, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands within those districts
 have cases included in the database. Districts and states that have
information in the data are listed in the codebook.