This study examined the public's preferences regarding sentencing and parole of criminal offenders. It also investigated the public's willingness to pay for particular crime prevention and control strategies and tested new methods for gathering this kind of information from the public. This involved asking the public to respond to a series of crime vignettes that involved constrained choice. The study consisted of a telephone survey of 1,300 adult respondents conducted in 2000 in the United States. Following a review by a panel of experts and extensive pretesting, the final instrument was programmed for computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI). The questionnaire specifically focused on: (1) the attitudes of the public on issues such as the number of police on the street, civil rights of minority groups, and the legal rights of people accused of serious crimes, (2) the randomized evaluation of preferred sentencing alternatives for eight different crime scenarios, (3) making parole decisions in a constrained choice setting by assuming that there is only enough space for one of two offenders, (4) the underlying factors that motivate the public's parole decisions, and (5) respondents' willingness to pay for various crime prevention strategies.

These data were gathered in order to evaluate the implications of rational choice theory for offender rehabilitation. The hypothesis of the research was that income-enhancing prison rehabilitation programs are most effective for the economically motivated offender. The offender was characterized by demographic and socio-economic characteristics, criminal history and behavior, and work activities during incarceration. Information was also collected on type of release and post-release recidivistic and labor market measures. Recividism was measured by arrests, convictions, and reincarcerations, length of time until first arrest after release, and seriousness of offense leading to reincarceration.

The study examined the first five years of operation of Kansas senate bill 123 (November 2003-November 2008) examining individual-level and system-level outcomes over time and across community corrections districts and judicial actors. The study also assesses the impact of SB 123 on the work routines of criminal justice system actors, examining changes in sentencing and supervision practices and interactions across agencies following the implementation of SB 123. Individual-level impacts of SB 123 on recidivism rates are assessed using sentencing and revocation data collected by the Kansas Sentencing Commission for drug possessors sentenced in Kansas between November 1, 2001 and October 31, 2008 (Dataset 1). Propensity score matching was used to compare the revocation and reconviction rates of drug possessors sentenced to SB 123 with the recidivism rates of similar individuals sentenced to regular probation (standard supervision by community corrections or court services) (Dataset 2). Supervision and program participation data provided by the Kansas Department of Corrections were used to assess the use of drug treatment services, education and employment services, and sanctions for individuals sentenced to SB 123 or standard community corrections (Dataset 3). These quantitative data were complemented by a set qualitative data derived from interviews with SB 123-eligible offenders (Dataset 4), community corrections managers, and courtroom actors (judges, prosecutors, public defenders) (Dataset 5).

The primary purpose of this data collection was to study whether prosecutorial behavior was affected by the implementation of federal criminal sentencing guidelines in 1987. Monthly time series data were constructed on a number of prosecutorial outcomes, representing either discrete decision steps in the processing of criminal cases or the characteristics of cases that passed through the system. Variables include disposition year and month, number of matters initiated, number of cases filed, declined, and dismissed, number of convictions by trial, by jury, and by bench trial, number of guilty pleas, ratio of guilty pleas to cases resolved, and ratio of trials to cases resolved. The collection also provides a series of dichotomous variables to assess the impact of various events on prosecutorial outcomes over time. These events include the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 (effective November 1986), implementation of the sentencing guidelines (November 1987), Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (November 1988), United States Supreme Court's decision in the Minstretta case affirming the constitutionality of the sentencing guidelines (January 1989), and Attorney General Thornburgh's memo outlining Justice Department policy on charging and prosecution (March 1989).

The purpose of this study was to provide a comprehensive assessment of the usefulness and effectiveness of prediction and classification of offenders under community supervision. A felony cohort data collection instrument was developed to test the validity of the Wisconsin Risk and Need Instrument in use in Texas, as well as to develop "better" predictor variables for a variety of dependent variables. Using the felony cohort data instrument, the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Community Justice Assistance Division (TDCJ-CJAD) collected detailed statewide information on 3,405 felony offenders placed on probation in Texas during October 1993. Specifically, the form was completed by a probation officer on all felony probation intakes at the time the initial case classification risk/needs assessment was conducted. Additionally, follow-up forms were developed and administered to track the offenders' progress at one year, two years, and three years. Variables include probationer information, current offense, criminal history, social history, substance abuse, probation sanctions, case classification risk items, and case classification need items. Additional variables include felony cohort one-year follow-up data form questions, felony cohort second-year follow-up data form questions, and felony cohort third-year follow-up data form questions.

The primary purpose of this data collection was to examine the impact of the implementation of sentencing guidelines on the rate of incarcerative and nonincarcerative sentences imposed and on the average length of expected time to be served in incarceration for all offenses as well as for select groups of offenses. The measure of sentence length, "expected time to be served," was used to allow for assumed good time and parole reductions. This term represents the amount of time an offender can expect to spend in prison at the time of sentencing, a roughly equivalent standard that can be measured before and after the implementation of federal criminal sentencing guidelines in 1987. Three broad offense categories were studied: drug offenses, robbery, and economic crimes. Drug offenses include a wide range of illegal activities involving marijuana, heroin, and cocaine. Robbery includes bank and postal robbery (both armed and unarmed) as well as other types of robbery offenses that appear less frequently in the federal system, such as carrying a firearm during the commission of a robbery. Economic offenses include fraud (bank, postal, and other), embezzlement (bank, postal, and other), and tax evasion. Other monthly data are provided on the number of prison and probation sentences for all offenses and by offense categories.

Using data from RECIDIVISM OF PRISONERS RELEASED IN 1994: [UNITED STATES] (ICPSR 3355), this study developed an analytical approach to utilize detailed dated criminal arrest history information in order to investigate whether, and to what extent, incarceration is able to deter offenders from future offending. This data collection consists of the syntax for a SAS macro used to estimate individual specific offending micro-trajectories, project counterfactual trajectories, and to assess the actual post-release offending patterns against the backdrop of these counterfactuals. The arrest records of individuals were clustered in chronological order and were truncated after the first post-release re-arrest event. The key independent variables used in estimating the pre-release criminal history accumulation process included the arrest number, the age at first arrest, whether or not the individual was confined as a result of the previous arrest event, and a measure of the number of years taken to reach each arrest event cumulated through the last arrest event. The same set of basic variables were used to model first re-arrest after release (recidivism).

The major objective of the Six-year Follow-up Study on Career Criminals was to provide data describing the effects of sentencing decisions on the behavior of career criminals. A second purpose was to develop programs to target career offenders at the time of sentencing who were likely to commit crimes in the future and incarcerate them accordingly. The data collection includes detailed demographic background and complete prior and follow-up criminal records for each selected offender. There are two types of data sets in the study, the PSI data set based on pre-sentence investigation (PSI) reports, and the Parole data set based on Parole Commission records. The PSI data set describes each offender's demographic background, criminal history, and court entry/exit history. The Parole data set contains information about the offender's background characteristics, prior records of arrests, convictions, dispositions and sentences, and follow-up records for a period of six years. Arrests are described in terms of arrest date, offense charge, disposition, result of sentence, and months incarcerated.

The main goal of this study was to construct and test a statistically based system of classifying inmates for one or more types of Substance Abuse Intervention Division (SAID) sponsored treatment programs within the New York Department of Corrections (DOC) system. The sample used for the prediction models was a sample of recent jail inmates identified as eligible for admission to SAID. DOC provided data from its Inmate Information System (IIS) database on each of the cases. Researchers collected two sets of data: one that employed only DOC data (Part 1) and another that included supplementary data from the Division of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) and the New York City Criminal Justice Agency (CJA) (Part 2). The DOC data (Part 1) fall into four main categories: demographic characteristics, information on the current case, prior criminal record information, and SAID eligibility information. Part 2, DOC and Supplementary Data, includes all the DOC items from Part 1 along with other data collected from DCJS and the New York City CJA.