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.

These data were collected to examine the practices and views of state trial court judges with respect to their use of fines as a criminal sanction. Respondents were asked about the composition of their caseloads, sentencing practices (including fines imposed for various circumstances), available information about the offender at time of sentencing, enforcement and collection procedures in their courts, and their attitudes toward the use of fines. In addition to questions concerning the judges' use of fines and other sanctions, the questionnaire presented the judges with hypothetical cases.

This study was undertaken to examine the ways in which different felony sanctions impact the future behavior of felony offenders. The study sought to determine whether the following made a difference in subsequent criminal behavior: (1) sentences of confinement, (2) the length of sentence (both the sentence imposed and that which was actually served), and (3) sentences of probation combined with jail ("split" sentences), or combined with fines, restitution, or other alternative sanctions. Data were collected from questionnaires completed by 18 judges of the Essex County, New Jersey, courts and by probation staff. Follow-up data were collected from official records provided by probation, jail, prison, and parole case files. Follow-up data were also collected from the following official records: (1) the New Jersey Offender-Based Transaction System Computerized Criminal History, (2) the New Jersey Department of Corrections Offender-Based Correctional Information System, (3) the United States Department of Justice Interstate Identification Index, (4) the National Crime Information Center Wanted Persons File, (5) the New Jersey PROMIS/GAVEL Prosecutors Case Tracking System, and (6) administrative record files of the New Jersey Department of Corrections. Variables in the data file include the most serious offense charge, most serious offense of conviction, dimension of conviction, offense type (person, property, social order, fraud, or drug offense), number of prior probations, number of probation revocations, number of prior jail and prison terms, mitigating and aggravating factors affecting the sentence, type of sentence, special conditions of probation, fines and restitutions imposed, minimum and maximum incarceration terms (in months), history of drug offenses, type of drugs used, probation and parole violations, total number of prior arrests and prior convictions, and longest arrest-free period after first arrest. The type of post-sentence offense, dimension, disposition charge, sentence, and date of arrest are provided for arresting events and charge episodes 1 through 108 for any offender. For up to 43 arrest events (for any offender), the date of lockup and date of exit from confinement are provided. The file also includes recommendations made by prosecutors and probation officers, and judges' ratings (on a scale of one to nine) with respect to the likelihood of an offender committing future property crimes, crimes against persons, or any crime. Judges also rated the arrest record length, conviction record length, and social stability of each offender. Retribution points, incapacitation points, and specific deterrence points assigned by the judges complete the file. Demographic variables include the race and sex of each convicted offender, and the age of the offender at first conviction.

The purpose of this data collection was to identify those attributes of offenders that are most often associated with receiving particular types of financial penalties along with probation, such as fines, restitution, and cost of probation. A further purpose was to estimate the relative effectiveness of these penalties in preventing recidivism. Variables include descriptions of the type of offense and penalties received, the location of the court where sentencing took place, and information about the individual's race, age, gender, level of education, employment, living arrangements, and financial status. Prior arrests and convictions are included, as are arrests, convictions, and penalties subsequent to the original case under study. Also provided are six sets of variables that describe all offenders within each conviction category. These six groups provide additional information about the offender's background and behavior. The conviction categories include assault, burglary, drug crimes, driving under the influence, theft, and indecent exposure.

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.

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).

In order to assess the impacts of state-level sentencing and corrections policies in the United States implemented between 1975 and 2002 on state incarceration rates during that same time period, researchers conducted a two-phase study between November 2002 and March 2004. The first phase of the research involved building a framework for understanding the types of state-level sentencing and corrections policies in use between 1975 and 2002. Phase two of the project consisted of state-level data collection for all 50 states for all study years, 1975 to 2002. The researchers produced a dataset containing outcome variables that focus on the change and growth in state incarceration rates, non-policy control variables that were found in previous studies to be associated with changes in incarceration rates, and policy variables regarding sentencing structure, drug policy, time served requirements, habitual offender laws (HOL), and mandatory sentences.

The purpose of the study was to quantify the effect of the embrace of DNA technology on offender behavior. In particular, researchers examined whether an offender's knowledge that their DNA profile was entered into a database deterred them from offending in the future and if probative effects resulted from DNA sampling. The researchers coded information using criminal history records and data from Florida's DNA database, both of which are maintained by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), and also utilized court docket information acquired through the Florida Department of Corrections (FDOC) to create a dataset of 156,702 cases involving offenders released from the FDOC in the state of Florida between January 1996 and December 2004. The data contain a total of 50 variables. Major categories of variables include demographic variables regarding the offender, descriptive variables relating to the initial crime committed by the offender, and time-specific variables regarding cases of recidivism.

This data collection examines the effects of sentencing on offenders' subsequent criminal behaviors. The data address the following questions: (1) At what point in the criminal career is the criminal career interrupted or halted by the criminal justice system because the offender is "taken off the streets?" (2) How long is the criminal career interrupted as a result of intervention from the criminal justice system? (3) How significant are the effects of past criminal behavior, as opposed to offender characteristics, such as education, employment history, or drug use, on criminal behavior subsequent to sentencing? (4) How do the effects of sentencing differ among offenders according to background, criminal history, and offense? Special characteristics of the collection include detailed information on the demographic and psychological background of defendants, a description of the offenses and the victims, and criminal recidivism information for adult defendants. More specifically, the sentence file contains data on the defendant's family, educational background, psychological condition, social activities, financial status, employment history, substance abuse, prior and follow-up criminal records, sentence and correctional histories, and other disposition information. The event file provides data on arrest and court appearances as well as data on incarcerations, escapes, transfers, releases, paroles, and furloughs.