Much like prior attempts at devising a set of performance indicators around justice, this starts with the idea of treating similarly situated defendants similarly, seeking to eliminate disparities, and holding all defendants accountable. But it is also about the integrity of the process – ensuring that prosecutors offices are meeting ethical obligations.
What kinds of questions can we ask? We can think about this as answering a few questions: Are we treating all defendants equitably without racial, ethnic, gender, or socioeconomic disparity? Are we getting the most appropriate outcome or sentence? Are we prosecuting cases ethically without overcharging and while meeting all procedural requirements?
Diversion and deferral programs have become a common alternative to traditional prosecution. Prosecutors should ensure that diversion/deferral programs are equally accessible and not excessively burdensome for minority defendants.
The charts below shows the percent of cases resulting in deferred prosecution for different racial/ethnic groups.
Systematic differences in charge changes, i.e. amendments of charges from a felony to a misdemeanor, across racial/ethnic groups can lead to disparities in sentencing. Given that 95% of cases are disposed of via guilty plea, racial/ethnic equity in plea bargaining ensures that the vast majority of cases receive fair outcomes.
The chart below shows the percent of felony cases resulting in plea to a misdemeanor for different racial/ethnic groups.
Prosecutors have discretion over charging, which ultimately drives sentencing outcomes. It is important to ensure accurate charging decisions based on the facts of the case. However, prosecutors may decide to decrease a felony to a misdemeanor.
The chart below shows the percent of felony cases resulting in plea to a misdemeanor.