By Frank R. Baumgartner 

I have compiled data from the FBI Supplemental Homicide Reports from 1976 through 2019 (the last data currently available) on homicides in Florida and in Duval County, and information about all death sentences imposed in those two jurisdictions since the modern system of capital punishment was created in Florida 1973. This consists of a record of 1,103 death sentences imposed state-wide and 112 in Duval County. The corresponding numbers of homicide offenders are 20,831 (state-wide) and 1,742 (Duval County). I have used this data to calculate rates of death sentences per 100 homicides, in Florida and in Duval County, by race of offender, race of victim, gender of offender, and gender of victim. This report begins by describing the race and gender information I collected and how often it was missing. It next presents a detailed table to document the figures used to calculate the rates of death sentences per 100 homicides in Florida and Duval. My narrative analysis of these tables follows, after which I give a similar analysis limited to those cases in Florida resulting in execution. As will be seen, I ultimately conclude that neither death sentences nor executions are applied in an equal manner; they are instead driven powerfully by the race and gender of the victim, with the highest rates of death sentencing and executions, both in Florida and Duval County, reserved for black offenders who kill white victims, and highest of all for black men who kill white women.  

Washington, DC: American Civil Liberties Union, 2023. 42p.

By Tim Lyman, Frank R. Baumgartner, and Glenn L. Pierce 

Out of 6,512 homicides from 1976 through 2014, we review the outcomes of 1,822 capitally charged homicide cases across eight judicial districts in Louisiana. In most cases, capital charges were reduced; but in 385 cases, the state sought death to the final stage of the prosecution. In 107 cases, a death sentence was imposed. We analyze these outcomes, looking at legally relevant factors, as well as legally irrelevant ones, in determining final capital charges and death sentences. Legally relevant factors include the number of victims as well as various statutory aggravating circumstances (e.g., victims under 12 or over 64, simultaneous felony circumstances, the type of weapon, and the relationship between the victim and offender). Legally irrelevant factors include the judicial district and the race and gender of the offenders and victims, respectively. Many legally relevant factors have powerful impacts: the number of victims, certain felony circumstances, child victims, and elderly victims are all associated with higher rates of final capital charging or death sentencing. But we also show that factors that appear legally irrelevant in theory have powerful effects; rates of capital prosecution and death sentencing are substantially different based on the race of the victim and the combined races of the offenders and the victims, for example. We found only modest differences across the eight judicial districts we studied, but especially significant differences in rates of final capital charges and death sentences in cases that involved white victims, particularly white females. No demographic combination was as likely to see a final capital charge or a death sentence as those cases with a black male offender and a white female victim, which were more than five times as likely to lead to a final capital charge or a death sentence, compared to the much more frequent crimes involving black offenders and black victims. These findings come after a review of the bivariate relations as well as a series of multivariate logistic regressions. The Louisiana death penalty system is heavily weighted by a tendency to seek the harshest penalties in those cases with white female victims. Our powerful and consistent findings of racial and gender-based disparities hold in a multivariate analysis and are inconsistent with the equal protection of the law or any common understanding of equality or justice. 

SUL Rev., 2021

By MacArthur Foundation

The fair and just treatment of racial and ethnic minorities at all stages of the criminal justice system is of significant importance to communities of color, practitioners, and scholars alike. Central to this discourse is a recognition of the discretionary power that prosecutors wield in shaping the outcomes of criminal cases. This includes, among other things, the decision to file or drop a case, amend the severity and number of charges, and dispose of criminal cases through plea bargaining. This report focuses on the outcomes of prosecutorial decision making in Milwaukee County, Wisconsin. Specifically, it assesses the extent to which racial and ethnic disparities exist across the following five decision points in criminal case processing: (1) Case charging; (2) Charge changes from arrest to charging; (3) Disposition type; (4) Charge changes from charging to disposition; and (5) Sentencing. We encourage the reader to interpret the results while recognizing that criminal case processing can trigger disparate outcomes for racial and ethnic minorities for a number of different reasons. Some of these reasons, such as defense attorney role and judicial discretion, are beyond the immediate control of prosecutors. At the same time, our partners are keenly aware that prosecutors can and should play a vital role in uncovering and addressing racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal justice system, and this report stems from that recognition. The intent of this report is to prompt discussion and raise questions, rather than provide definitive answers. We also want to stress that the findings presented throughout this report cannot be used to support or refute possible racial and ethnic biases. Our methodology simply does not permit that. Rather than serving as an end point, we view this report as a starting point from which to engage in meaningful discussions concerning policies and procedures that can ameliorate racial and ethnic disparities in case outcomes. Furthermore, given that prosecutorial decision making does not operate in a vacuum, certain findings direct attention to ways district attorney’s offices, the defense bar, law enforcement agencies, and the judiciary can galvanize future reform efforts. Even more importantly, continued efforts to engage with minority communities will be critical for increasing public trust in and cooperation with the criminal justice system. This report is part of a series of publications resulting from this partnership. The first report, Prosecutorial Attitudes, Perspectives, and Priorities: Insights from the Inside, was released in December, 2018. The second report, Race, Ethnicity and Prosecution in Hillsborough County, Florida, was released in July, 2019. The final report in the series, focused on prosecutorial performance indicators, will be released near the end of 2019.   

2019. 62p.

By Florida International University and Loyola University Chicago

This project is a groundbreaking partnership between prosecutors and researchers to promote more effective, just, and transparent decision-making in prosecution. It is a bipartisan effort to be smart on crime, to think about new ways to maximize public safety, to enhance fairness, and to create a new system of accountability to the public. It involves four forward-thinking prosecutors in Cook County (IL), Jacksonville (FL), Milwaukee County (WI), and Tampa (FL) working with researchers at Florida International University and Loyola University Chicago to take a new look at prosecutorial performance and decision-making. This partnership is supported by the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Improving prosecutorial performance and decision-making is impossible without data. Data takes center stage in the project because it tells prosecutors what problems are the biggest threats to community well-being, and it points to ways to tackle those problems. Data helps measure the overall impact of prosecutors’ work, and it alerts them that a policy or practice needs to be continued or changed. Unfortunately, most prosecutors’ offices cannot collect, analyze, and apply data to these ends. Many offices do not record the data they need. Others are missing the staff and knowledge necessary to analyze their data. Still other offices—probably most—do not have the ability and commitment to use data to guide their decisions and reforms. This project focuses on helping our partner offices and other interested jurisdictions overcome these hurdles. The project has four distinct objectives: What The Project Is About While the project targets performance in our four partner jurisdictions, it also aims to use the knowledge generated from this experiment to advance the field of prosecution nationally. There are more than 2,300 local prosecutors’ offices in the United States, but very few organizations specialize in prosecutorial research and technical assistance. Realistically, most prosecutors’ offices will not receive any direct meaningful assistance. By building sustainable data collection, performance measurement, and communication practices for the four offices, this project provides a set of blueprints that offices across the country can use to make their own internal improvements. We realize there is no one-size-fits-all approach to prosecutorial office management that will meet every office’s needs. Writing a prescription for a patient we have not examined is hard. However, the project provides a model that other offices can use to start thinking about forming local partnerships, improving data capacity, and producing metrics for assessing their own impact. The backdrop for this project is the Safety & Justice Challenge, the MacArthur Foundation initiative to reduce jail misuse and overuse as both a crucial component and a major driver of America’s over-reliance on incarceration. Unnecessary jail incarceration carries significant costs to individuals, families, communities, and society at large. These costs take their greatest toll on low-income people and communities of color. The Safety & Justice Challenge supports local leaders who are dedicated to safely reducing jail populations, improving justice systems, and ultimately strengthening their communities. To expand offices’ data and analytical capacity by assessing case management systems, making better use of existing data, and exploring options for capturing new information without creating additional burdens for prosecutors. To assist prosecutors with tracking their progress toward greater efficiency, effectiveness, and fairness using prosecutorial performance indicators at the office and unit levels (as opposed to the individual prosecutor level). To identify possible racial and ethnic disparities at various stages of case processing across offense categories, and to work with stakeholders to develop specific solutions to reduce them. To establish a practice of using data to measure monthly or quarterly performance and engage with the communities While the project targets performance in our four partner jurisdictions, it also aims to use the knowledge generated from this experiment to advance the field of prosecution nationally. There are more than 2,300 local prosecutors’ offices in the United States, but very few organizations specialize in prosecutorial research and technical assistance. Realistically, most prosecutors’ offices will not receive any direct meaningful assistance. By building sustainable data collection, performance measurement, and communication practices for the four offices, this project provides a set of blueprints that offices across the country can use to make their internal improvements. We realize there is no one-size-fits-all approach to prosecutorial office management that will meet every office’s needs. Prescribing for a patient we have not examined is hard. However, the project provides a model that other offices can use to start thinking about forming local partnerships, improving data capacity, and producing metrics for assessing their impact. The backdrop for this project is the Safety & Justice Challenge, the MacArthur Foundation initiative to reduce jail misuse and overuse as both a crucial component and a major driver of America’s over-reliance on incarceration. Unnecessary jail incarceration carries significant costs to individuals, families, communities, and society at large. These costs take their greatest toll on low-income people and communities of color. The Safety & Justice Challenge supports local leaders who are dedicated to safely reducing jail populations, improving justice systems, and ultimately strengthening their communities. This report presents findings from an assessment of racial and ethnic disparities in prosecution and sentencing in Cook County, Illinois. Multiple decision points are analyzed, including case charging, changes in charge severity from arrest to charging, disposition type, changes in charge severity from charging to conviction, and sentencing. Because the findings vary by decision points and offense categories, each finding should be examined and assessed independently

Miami; Florida International University and Chicago: Loyola University Chicago, 2019. 50p.

By Florida International University and Loyola University Chicago

Diversion is increasingly used by prosecutors in the United States. As an alternative to formal prosecution, diversion programs provide opportunities to avoid conviction, address substance use and mental health needs, and maintain employment and community ties. However, the diversion process can be a source of racial and ethnic disparities. Who gets diverted and who completes diversion successfully has a lot to do with income. Irrespective of skin color, poor individuals are disadvantaged for a variety of reasons, ranging from the quality of legal advice to hefty fees. While we acknowledge that diversion differences can stem from socioeconomic factors, this report focuses specifically on how race and ethnicity influence diversion decisions.

Miami: FIU; Chicago: Loyola University Chicago: 2021. 26p.

By Matthew B Robinson

The book provides a thorough summary of the relationships between race, ethnicity, crime, and justice practice and discusses the existence of disparities in criminal and juvenile justice practices and highlights the impact of race and ethnicity on the law, policing, courts, and corrections.It addresses the issue of institutionalized discrimination against different racial and ethnic groups in American institutions, including the criminal law and mainstream media.

Carolina Academic Press, 2021, 317 pages