The prosecutor's office wouldn't help.
I'm surprised you're suggesting it's that high with the propensity of the victims to recant, but that's good news.
The prosecutor's office wouldn't help.
I'm surprised you're suggesting it's that high with the propensity of the victims to recant, but that's good news.
The conviction rate is based upon charges filed for prosecution. A prosecutor does not file on every crime reported, nor on every arrest. They file those cases they believe they can win at trial. As such, the conviction rate tends to be quite high since a plea bargain that results in a guilty plea is still a conviction. If you want to know the rate of conviction when compared to the number of crimes reported, that's a different animal altogether and would require some considerable research on your part as many prosecutor's offices will not have the complete information.
My definition of "conviction rate" would be the number of convictions (anything other than a non-guilty finding or dismissal) divided by the number of criminal charges.
I found this: http://www.fcmcclerk.com/documents/a...MC_AR_2016.pdf
It includes the number 4,042 for the number of criminal charges filed in 2016. That would be the denominator.
What I would like to find out is how many of those 4,024 criminal charges resulted in anything other than a non-guilty finding or dismissal. I understand that some charges are dropped or modified to something other than the original charge and the accused still suffers legal consequences (e.g., domestic violence dropped while accompanying assault charge remains), but due to the difficulty of finding that info, I would ignore that for purposes of this and just view the DV charge individually.
Thanks for any suggestions on where I might look for these data.
Edit: It's old, but I found this, and includes Franklin Co., Ohio, in the representative counties: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/scpdvc.pdf
Just to summarize for purposes of this thread...
From the 2002 Bureau of Justice report, it does not break out those charged and convicted as misdemeanors, but it does report on the conviction rate (defendants may have been charged with felonies or misdemeanors, although the felony may have been later dropped down to a misdemeanor -- this was counted as a conviction).
From "Table 3: Conviction rates of prosecuted domestic and non-domestic violence defendants charged in 15 large counties during May 2002," the percentage of all prosecuted defendants who were charged and convicted for "aggravated assault: domestic" was 86.5%.
That's a fair bit lower than what What'sThatGuy suggested, but it still is high, I think.
Once more I remind you that criminal charges are those forwarded by the prosecutor's office, not the total number of reports or even arrests made by law enforcement. Therefore, the conviction rate is likely to be quite high as most DAs do not proceed to trial with cases they are likely to lose, so they choose not to file charges - and, thus, it would not be among those 4,042.
To research ALL the relevant numbers, you would have to seek data from each and every law enforcement agency asking for the number of reports and arrests for the offense(s) you are interested in and then dividing it by whatever number you feel most appropriate. Buty, keep in mind, that agencies that do not have the data you seek are generally under no legal obligation to create the data for you. A researcher delving into such a matter might take many hours delving through face sheets, reports, etc. in an effort to cull the data they seek.
WHY do you want this info? Are you simply trying to get an idea of your chances at trial? If so, keep in mind that if the prosecutor files THEY feel they have a strong enough case to prevail at trial.
It is possible that the state Bar Association or some statewide court or prosecutor organization may have info on convictions at trial or overall. But, my previous caveats still apply and I believe you will find the numbers still quite high unless you include reports and arrests for which charges are NOT filed.
I'm not interested in the data you are suggested I'm interested in. Why do you keep insisted I am interested in something I have very clearly stated I'm not? I know that is irrelevant, but I find that fascinating from a psychological perspective that you would keep coming back to this, and I'm genuinely curious as to what your answer is.
I mean, it's like I'm asking, "Does anyone know where I can find horsepower ratings for large American pickup trucks," and you keep saying "You'll never find the maximum torque data for diesel-powered box vans; why do you keep looking for that?" Again... fascinating...
I'm interested in charges filed by prosecutors and convictions or guilty pleas.
(*Waiting anxiously to see if you once again suggest I want to know something else!*)
Ha ha! Just kidding. I know you mean no harmIt's just the whole "re-framing the facts of the discussion so it's easier for me to feel superior on the Internet thing"
Seriously, though, the BoJ report nailed what I was looking for, mostly. It isn't just about Franklin Co., and it's pretty old, but it will do for now.
Also, for the record, I'm not charged with, under suspicion for, guilty of, accused of, a victim of or anything else related to domestic violence or assault. Why would you ask that, by the way?
Have a beautiful day!
You're not correctly interpreting what "cdwjava" has been telling you, and he hasn't once suggested what you are or aren't interested in.
What "cdwjava" is doing is making a distinction.
First of all, you need to start with two sets of things: (1) cases in which DV has occurred (Set A); and (2) cases in which no DV has occurred but in which DV is alleged (Set B). Some percentage of Set A cases are never reported. We'll call those that are reported Set C. 100% of Set B cases are reported. We'll use Set D to refer to the sum of Set B and Set C.
Out of the Set D cases, some percent are never investigated and some are investigated. We'll use Set E to refer to those Set D cases that are investigated.
Out of the Set E cases, some result in an arrest and some don't. We'll use Set F to refer to those that result in an arrest.
Out of the Set F cases, some result in charges being filed and some don't. We'll use Set G to refer to cases in which charges are actually filed (we'll include in Set G cases in which no arrest is made but charges are filed anyway).
Out of the Set G cases, some go to trial and some don't. We'll use Set H to refer to cases that go to trial. We'll use Set J to refer to cases that are filed and then dismissed and Set K to refer to cases that are filed and result in plea bargains.
It sounds to me like you want Set G to be your denominator. Correct?
"cdwjava's" point seems to be that the percentage of Set H cases in which a conviction results is very high because prosecutors don't go to trial on cases that have a significant likelihood of not getting a conviction. While that's true, it's somewhat beside the point.
I believe it is also true that prosecutors don't file charges where there isn't a pretty good chance of getting a conviction. However, it should be obvious that the percentage of cases that result in convictions as a percentage of Set H cases will be higher than the percentage of cases that result in convictions as a percentage of Set G cases.
In any event, the sources of data for Random County, Ohio are going to be quite limited: the prosecutor's office or the public defender's office. Beyond that, you'll have to spend significant time at the court clerk's office combing through public records.
MOST people who seek such data do not understand the source of the info or the court system and how charges are filed. Many people presume that when a police report is made charges are preferred and that somehow this is included in such numbers. That's great if you understand the difference between a report, an arrest, and a filing. But, I cannot imagine what good such a number might do you since it is pretty much a stacked deck and the number is almost certainly going to stand in the realm of 90%+.
I DO recall doing statistical research in grad school. Ugh! One of my papers had to do with filings and conviction rates for sexual assaults ... there was more to the paper than that, but, the work was OMG-I-wanted-to-die!