U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Federal Criminal Case Processing, 1998 with trends 1982-98 Federal Justice Statistics: Reconciled Data August 1999, NCJ 169277 --------------------------------------------------------- This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.wk1) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/fccp98.htm This report is one in a series. More recent editions may be available. To view a list of all in the series go to http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pubalp2.htm#fccprd --------------------------------------------------------- Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D. Director, BJS This Bureau of Justice Statistics Report was prepared by the Urban Institute under the supervision of Steven K. Smith and John Scalia, Jr., of the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS). The project is supported by BJS grant number 98-BJ-CX-K015. Principal staff for the project at the Urban Institute were William J. Sabol, William Adams, David Kirk, Barbara Parthasarathy, Harvey Meyerson, Yan Yuan, and Christine Arriola. Layout and design were by David Williams and O. Jay Arwood. Tom Hester of BJS provided editorial review. This report is made possible through the cooperation of the following Federal agencies and their staffs: The Administrative Office of the United States Courts (AOUSC), the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA), and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). The staff who provided expert advice about the source records include: Steven Schlesinger, Catherine Whitaker, and Pragati Patrick (AOUSC); Barbara Tone (EOUSA); and Gerald Gaes and Nancy Miller (BOP). The contents of this document do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the Bureau of Justice Statistics or the U.S. Department of Justice. BJS authorizes any person to reproduce, publish, translate, or otherwise use all or any part of the material in this publication; citation to source, however, is appreciated. An electronic version of this report and the data underlying graphics may be found on the BJS Internet Home Page (http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/). The BJS-sponsored Federal Justice Statistics Resource Center (FJSRC) Internet Home Page (http://fjsrc.urban.org) provides online access to the Federal Justice database. Users may download data from the Federal Justice database for independent analysis or use the online query system to obtain customized statistics. To order additional copies of this report or CD-ROMs containing the Federal Justice database, call the BJS Clearinghouse at 1-800-732-3277. Highlights During 1998, U.S. attorneys initiated investigations involving 115,692 suspects for possible violations of Federal law. Almost a third (32%) of those investigated were suspected of a drug violation. Between 1994 and 1998, investigations initiated by U.S. attorneys have increased 16.5%-- from 99,251 to 115,692. Investigations for immigration violations increased from 5,526 to 14,114; for drug offenses, investigations increased from 29,311 to 36,355. During 1998, U.S. attorneys declined to prosecute a smaller proportion of those investigated. Declinations decreased from 36% of matters concluded during 1994 to 27% during 1998. Criminal charges were filed against 78,172 defendants in U.S. district courts during 1998-- a 25% increase since 1994. The number of defendants charged with an immigration offense increased from 2,453 to 9,254 and the number charged with a drug offense increased from 20,275 to 28,021. Drug prosecutions have comprised an increasing proportion of the Federal criminal caseload-- from 21% of defendants during 1982 to 35% during 1998. Under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, the proportion of defendants sentenced to prison increased from 54% during 1988 to 71% during 1998. The proportion of drug offenders sentenced to prison increased from 79% to 92%. Prison sentences imposed increased from 55.1 months during 1988 to 58.9 months during 1998. For drug offenses, prison sentences increased from 71.3 months to 78.7 months; for weapons offenses, sentences imposed increased from 52.3 months to 101.3 months. During 1998, 92,813 offenders were under Federal community supervision. Supervised release has become the primary form of supervision in the Federal system: 59.1% of offenders were on supervised release compared to 34.7% on probation, and 6.3% remaining on parole. On September 30, 1998, 107,912 offenders were serving a prison sentence in Federal prison; 58% were incarcerated for a drug offense; 11%, for a violent offense; 8% for a weapons offense; 8% for a property offense, 7% for an immigration offense; and 8% for all other offenses. Introduction Federal Criminal Case Processing, 1998, first in an annual series, provides statistics that describe defendants processed at different stages of the Federal criminal justice system for the 12-month period ending September 30, 1998. Also included are figures describing trends in Federal criminal case processing during the 1982-98 period. The data presented are compiled from the BJS Federal justice database. The Federal justice database is comprised of data provided by the Executive Office for the U.S. Attorneys, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, the U.S Sentencing Commission, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts provides data describing the Federal court docket-- criminal, civil, and appellate -- as well as pretrial services, probation, parole, and supervised release. The Federal justice database may be obtained electronically from the Federal Justice Statistics Resource Center or on CD-ROM from the BJS Clearinghouse. For more detailed information on obtaining the Federal justice database, see page ii. Statistics presented in this report include the number of suspects investigated by U.S. attorneys for possible violations of Federal law, the outcome of U.S. attorney investigations (prosecution or declination), the number of defendants prosecuted in U.S. district courts, the outcome of criminal cases (convicted, not convicted), sanctions imposed on defendants convicted (type of sentence imposed and length of imprisonment), the number and type of criminal appeals filed, and the number of offenders under Federal correctional supervision-- prison, probation, parole, and supervised release. A related publication, the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, while presenting many of the same statistics as those included in this report, provides more detail -- including statistics on up to 40 offense categories and statistics on additional case processing concepts such as pretrial release and demographic characteristics of offenders. Several case processing statistics presented in this report have previously been reported by the agencies. However, because individual agencies use different criteria to collect, tabulate, and report on case processing events, statistics published by each of the agencies may not be directly comparable. In this report, BJS has attempted to reconcile differences in data collection and reporting in order to present comparable statistics across stages of the Federal criminal justice system. For a description of the reconciliation effort and the methodology employed, see Comparing Case Processing Statistics (NCJ-169274) and Reconciling Federal Criminal Case Processing Statistics (NCJ-171680). Since many terms and concepts used in this report have specialized meanings-- either because they refer to specific provisions of Federal law or they refer to procedures used by agencies supplying the data -- readers are encouraged to refer to the glossary of the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics for definitions of concepts. Methodology The Federal justice database Source of data The source of data for all tables in Federal Criminal Case Processing is the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) Federal justice database. The database is presently constructed from source files provided by the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA), the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOUSC), and the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP). AOUSC also maintains the data collected by the U.S. Court of Appeals and the Federal Probation and Supervision Information System (FPSIS). Federal law prohibits the use of these files for any purpose other than research or statistics. A description of the source agency data files is provided in table M.2 at the end of this section. Data universe The universe of the BJS Federal justice database includes criminal suspects investigated for violations of Federal criminal law, defendants in cases filed in U.S. district courts, and offenders entering Federal corrections and correctional supervision. The universe of criminal suspects is limited to those whose matters were investigated by U.S. attorneys and in which the investigation took at least one hour of a U.S. attorney's time. The universe of defendants in Federal criminal courts is limited to those defendants whose cases were filed in a U.S. district court, whether before a U.S. district court judge or a U.S. magistrate. This includes all felony defendants, Class A misdemeanant defendants, and those defendants charged with petty offenses and handled by a U.S. district court judge. The universe of offenders includes all sentenced offenders entering Federal prison regardless of the source of their commitment (e.g., U.S. district court, State court, or military court, or return from a violation of conditions of supervision) or length of sentence. This may include some offenders who were convicted of immigration offenses who were committed for petty offenses. The universe of supervised offenders includes persons entering and exiting terms of Federal supervision, and persons under Federal supervision during the fiscal year. Supervision types include probation, parole, and supervised release. Included amongst parole supervisees are those under two less common types of "old law" supervision (sentenced prior to the implementation of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984): mandatory release and special release. The universe of suspects, defendants, and offenders varies from table to table in this report, depending on the definition of the statistic reported and the source of the data. Reporting period Wherever possible, matters or cases have been selected according to some event which occurred during fiscal year 1998 (October 1, 1997, through September 30, 1998). Some data files provided by source agencies are organized according to a calendar year time frame; these have been combined and divided into fiscal years for purposes of this report. Files which are organized by their source agencies according to fiscal year nonetheless include some pertinent records in later years' files. For example, tabulations of suspects in matters concluded during fiscal year 1998 have been assembled from source files containing records of 1998 matters concluded which were entered into the data system during fiscal years 1997 or 1998. In the figures showing trends in Federal criminal case processing, information is presented for a period between 1982 and 1998. Data from the EOUSA are estimated from 1982 through 1993, as data prior to 1993 included appeals information not included in the subsequent years. Because of changes in the reporting and collection of data over time, data collected prior to 1994 from AOUSC and EOUSA were reported on a calendar-year basis; data collected from 1994-1998 are on a fiscal-year basis. The figures are marked and noted according to the period of measurement. In figure 4, data collected from FPSIS reflect the supervised population as of June 30 for the period of 1987-1994, and the population as of September 30 for the period of 1995-1998. In figure 5, data collected from BOP, presented from 1985-1998, are reported on a fiscal-year basis. Table construction and interpretation Universe in each table The universe in tables 1 and 2, and figure 1 is suspects in criminal matters investigated by U.S. attorneys. A person appearing in multiple matters will be counted separately for each matter. Matters include criminal proceedings handled exclusively by U.S. attorneys, or in which U.S. attorneys provided assistance and spent at least one hour of time. The universe in tables 3, 4, and 5, as well as figures 2 and 3 is defendants adjudicated and sentenced in U.S. district court. Included are defendants charged with felonies, Class A and B misdemeanors, and petty offenses if the petty offenses are handled by U.S. district court judges. Defendants who appear in more than one case are counted separately for each distinct case in which they appear. Defendants may have been charged under "old law" (pre-Sentencing Reform Act) or "new law" (post-Sentencing Reform Act) standards. The universe in table 6 is criminal appeals filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals. Appeals filed include both Preguidelines- and Guidelines-based appeals. The Sentencing Reform Act allowed for the appeal of sentences imposed, where previously only the conviction could be appealed. The universe in table 7 and figure 4 is offenders entering, exiting, or under active supervision. Active supervision includes supervisees who report regularly to their supervising officers. Excluded are offenders released to military parole and offenders who are under community release prior to sentencing. The universe in table 8 and figure 5 is sentenced Federal offenders committed into Federal prison facilities -- regardless of the court from which they were committed and regardless of the length of sentence. This includes primarily offenders committed from U.S. district courts by U.S. district court judges, but also includes those committed by U.S. magistrates, military courts, and some State courts. In addition, it includes offenders who violated conditions of supervised release and who were returned to prison for their violations rather than from a court commitment. Unit of analysis The unit of analysis in tables 1 through 6 is a combination of a person (or corporation) and a matter or case. For example, if a single person is involved in three different criminal cases during the time period specified in the table, he or she is counted three times in the tabulation. Similarly, if a single criminal case involves a corporate defendant and four individual defendants, it counts five times in the tabulation. In tables 7 and 8, the unit of analysis for incarceration, probation, parole, or other supervised release is a person entering custody or supervision, or a person leaving custody or supervision. For example, a person convicted in two concurrent cases and committed once to the custody of the BOP in the indicated time period is counted as one admission to a term of incarceration. A person who leaves a BOP facility, reenters, and leaves again in the same fiscal-year period would be counted as one admission and two releases. A person who terminates probation twice in the indicated time period, such as with a violation and again after reinstatement, is counted as two terminations of probation. Interpretation The data presented in this report is a statistical presentation of offenders processed in the Federal criminal justice system. The tables presented describe the number of offenders processed, and the outcome of that processing, at each stage of the Federal criminal justice system. Because many tables represent different cross-sections of offenders, comparisons across tables are not necessarily valid. Offense classifications Procedure The offense classification procedure used in this report is based on the classification system followed by the AOUSC. Specific offenses in the AOUSC classification are combined to form the BJS categories shown in this report's tables.* For data from EOUSA (tables 1 and 2, figure 1), which include U.S. Code citations but do not include the AOUSC offense classifications, U.S. Code titles and sections are translated into the AOUSC classification system and then aggregated into the offense categories used in the tables. Offense categories for prisoners in table 8 are based on combinations of offense designations used by BOP. They are similar to the categories in other tables, but may not be directly comparable. Felony/misdemeanor distinctions Felony and misdemeanor distinctions are provided where possible. Felony offenses are those with a maximum penalty of more than 1 year in prison. Misdemeanor offenses are those with a maximum penalty of 1 year or less. Felonies and misdemeanors are further classified using the maximum term of imprisonment authorized. Section 3559, U.S. Code, Title 18 classifies offenses according to the following schedule: Felonies Class A felony-- life imprisonment, or if the maximum penalty is death. Class B felony-- 25 years or more. Class C felony -- less than 25 years but more than 10 years. Class D felony -- less than 10 years but more than 5 years. Class E felony-- less than 5 years but more than 1 year. Misdemeanors Class A misdemeanor-- 1 year or less but more than 1 months. Class B misdemeanor-- 6 months or less but more than 30 days. Class C misdemeanor-- 30 days or less but more than 5 days. Infraction-- 5 days or less, or if no imprisonment is authorized. In this report, felony and misdemeanor distinctions are provided where the data permit these distinctions. Tables 1 and 2 do not use this distinction because many suspects cannot be so classified at the investigation stage in the criminal justice process. Table 6 does not use this distinction because the Court of Appeals data do not allow for such a breakout. Table 8 does not use this distinction because BOP offense categories do not allow for such a breakout. None of the figures showing trend data report this distribution. Classification level Offenses in the tables in this report are classified, at the most general level, into felony and misdemeanor categories. Felonies are then broken out by four main level offense classifications: violent, property, drug, and public-order offenses. Property and public-order offenses are broken out into two sublevels. The main-level and sub-group categories are composed of individual offense types. Where the data source allows, drug offenses are broken out into the individual offense level. "Other public-order offenses" include a limited breakout at the individual offense type level. Table M.1 includes a list of specific offenses under each offense category. Offense categories For offenses referred to in table M.1, the following conditions apply: "Murder" includes nonnegligent manslaughter. "Other sex offenses" may include some nonviolent offenses. "Fraud" excludes tax fraud. "Larceny" excludes transportation of stolen property. "Other property felonies" excludes fraudulent property offenses, and includes destruction of property and trespass. "Tax law violations" includes tax fraud. "Obscene material" denotes the mail or transport thereof. "All other felonies" includes felonies with unclassifiable offense type. "Misdemeanors" includes misdemeanors, petty offenses, and unknown offense levels. "Drug possession" also includes other drug misdemeanors. Most serious offense selection Where more than one offense is charged or adjudicated, the most serious offense (the one that may or did result in the most severe sentence) is used to classify offenses. The offense description may change as the criminal justice process proceeds. Tables indicate whether investigated, charged, or adjudicated offenses are used. In tables 1 and 2, the most serious offense is based on the criminal lead charge as determined by the assistant U.S. attorney responsible for the criminal proceeding. In tables 3 and 4, the most serious offense charged is the one that has the most severe potential sentence. For table 5, conviction offenses are based on the disposition offenses having the most severe penalty. In table 6, an offense is classified into the category that represents the underlying offense of conviction, based on the disposition offense with the most severe sentence. In table 7, the most serious offense of conviction is either the one having the longest sentence imposed or, if equal sentences were imposed or there was no imprisonment, it was the offense carrying the highest severity code as determined by AOUSC's offense severity code ranking. In table 8, prisoners are classified according to the offense which bears the longest single incarceration sentence. Estimations Several methods were used to estimate the trend data in this report. Estimated number of suspects in criminal matters Because of a change in the reporting protocol for information received from the EOUSA effective with fiscal year 1994 data, it was necessary to estimate certain statistics for years 1982-1993. Prior to 1994, reports of the number of suspects in criminal matters included appellants in Federal criminal appeals. Because full-source agency data prior to 1994 could not be accessed, an estimation procedure was used to estimate the number of appellants within main offense categories and then subtract them from the number of suspects in criminal matters which included appellants. The procedure is described in the following paragraphs. The objective was to estimate the number of appellants included in reports of the number of suspects in criminal matters. This is denoted below as AEO. Using existing data on appellants derived from alternative sources, such as AOUSC reports, an estimator was developed based on the assumption that the ratio of appellants to defendants plus appellants in the EOUSA data was equal to the observed ratio of appellants to appellants plus defendants in the AOUSC data, or: where: AAO = number of AO appellants DAO = number of AO defendants AEO = number of EO appellants DEO = number of EO defendants Solving for AEO yields: Solving for AEO yields the estimator above. This estimator was used to produce estimates each year between 1982 and 1993 using data from these years. The estimated number of appellants in suspects in criminal matters was subtracted from the reported number to derive the estimated number of suspects in criminal matters. These were used in figure 1. These estimates were done at the level of offense category (violent, property, drugs, and public order). Estimated expected time to be served for offenders entering prison The methodology for estimating expected time to be served to first release for prisoners entering the BOP system from a district court commitment involves grouping prisoners by their fiscal year of entry. Once this grouping has occurred, each prisoner is classified into one of the following categories: a prisoner who has been released by the end of the observation window (1985-1998); a prisoner still incarcerated at the end of the observation window who was sentenced prior to the passage of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 (an "old law" prisoner); a prisoner still incarcerated at the end of the observation window who was sentenced after to the passage of the Sentencing Reform Act (a "new law" prisoner). For prisoners in category (a) actual time served is recorded. For those prisoners in category (b) a lower bound estimate of time to be served is used, based on actual data from similar prisoners in previous entering years. For prisoners in category (c) a lower bound of 85% of the sentence imposed, the minimum sentence to be served under the Sentencing Reform Act, is recorded. A weighted average of all three estimation components is taken, using the percentage distribution of prisoner types (a), (b), and (c) in an entering cohort. Statistics appearing in Federal Criminal Case Processing, 1998 The statistics appearing in this report are as follows: Table 1. Suspects in matters investigated by U.S. attorneys This is the number of suspects in criminal matters whom U.S. attorneys spent at least one hour investigating. It excludes suspects whose matters were immediately declined or whose matters were received via transfer from another district. An immediate declination is one in which a U.S. attorney declines to prosecute a criminal matter without investigating the matter. Suspects may include persons, corporations, or other legal entities. Matters are limited to criminal matters investigated by U.S. attorneys or matters in which U.S. attorneys assisted in the investigation. Suspects appearing in more than one matter are counted separately for each matter. Table 2. Suspects in matters concluded by U.S. attorneys This is the number of suspects in criminal matters concluded by U.S. attorneys, regardless of the year in which the criminal matter was opened. A matter is defined as concluded when a U.S. attorney files a case in a U.S. district court before a U.S. district court judge, when a U.S. attorney declines to prosecute the matter, or when a misdemeanor case is concluded before a U.S. magistrate. The table excludes suspects whose matter was declined immediately or whose matter was concluded by transfer. Suspects in matters concluded may include persons, corporations, or other legal entities and are limited to the suspects investigated or prosecuted by U.S. attorneys, or in which U.S. attorneys assisted in the investigation or prosecution. Suspects appearing in more than one matter are counted separately for each matter. Table 3. Defendants in cases commenced This is the number of defendants in cases proceeded in U.S. district court, either before a U.S. district court judge or a U.S. magistrate. Proceedings are initiated on or after the date a case is filed in a U.S. district court. Included in the count are defendants in cases handled by U.S. district court judges plus Class A misdemeanors, whether handled by a U.S. district court judge or a U.S. magistrate. Also included are defendants in cases involving petty offenses (Class B or C misdemeanors) if they were handled by U.S. district court judges. These cases included all cases commenced regardless of the source of prosecution-- U.S. attorneys or Department of Justice. Excluded from this count are defendants whose cases were opened by transfer from another district (e.g., a Rule 20 or Rule 40 transfer). Defendants appearing in more than one case are counted separately in each case. Table 4. Defendants in cases terminated This is the number of defendants whose cases were terminated in U.S. district court. A case is terminated if a defendant is found not guilty, the charges are dismissed, or when a defendants is sentenced, if he or she was convicted. Included in the count are defendants in cases handled by U.S. district court judges plus Class A misdemeanors, whether handled by a U.S. district court judge or a U.S. magistrate. Also included are defendants in cases involving petty offenses (Class B or C misdemeanors) if they were handled by U.S. district court judges. These cases included all cases commenced regardless of the source of prosecution-- U.S. attorneys or Department of Justice. Excluded from this count are defendants whose cases were opened by transfer from another district (e.g., a Rule 20 or Rule 40 transfer). Defendants appearing in more than one case are counted separately in each case. Defendants are classified as convicted if they plead guilt, nolo contendere, or if they are found guilty at trial. Defendants convicted by trial included those found guilty by reason of insanity. Defendants not convicted includes defendants whose cases were dismissed and those who were acquitted or found not guilty at trial. Table 5. Defendants sentenced This is the number of defendants sentenced in U.S. district court. Included are defendants sentenced in cases handled by U.S. district court judges plus Class A misdemeanors, whether handled by a U.S. district court judge or a U.S. magistrate. Also included are defendants sentenced for petty offenses (Class B or C misdemeanors) if they were handled by U.S. district court judges. These cases included all cases commenced regardless of the source of prosecution -- U.S. attorneys or Department of Justice. Excluded from this count are defendants whose cases were opened by transfer from another district (e.g., a Rule 20 or Rule 40 transfer). Defendants appearing in more than one case are counted separately in each case. The sanctions shown in table 5 include imprisonment only, mixed sentences of prison plus supervision, probation, and fine only. Imprisonment is limited to defendants receiving terms of imprisonment but no probation, including life and death sentences, but excluding suspended sentences or sentences to fewer than 4 days. New law offenders receiving prison-community split sentences (prison and conditions of alternative community confinement) are also included. Mixed sentences include defendants given sentences of both prison and probation (applies to offenders sentenced under "old law" standards only). Probation includes defendants given sentences of probation. Defendants who received probation plus conditions of confinement such as intermittent confinement, home detention, or community confinement are classified under probation. Fine only includes those defendants who received only a fine. Other sentences include sealed sentences, prison sentences of four days or less, deportations, and cases in which the defendant was convicted but not given a sentence. The statistics on mean and median prison sentences are based on the number given prison exclusive of life and death sentences. For offenders given prison-community split sentences, only the length of the prison sentence is included in the calculation. Table 6. Criminal appeals filed This table reports the number of criminal appeals filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals. Prior to implementation of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984, only criminal convictions could be appealed. However, the Sentencing Reform Act provided for the appellate review of sentences imposed given that the sentence was (1) imposed in violation of the law; (2) imposed as the result of an incorrect sentencing guideline application; (3) outside the recommended guideline sentencing range; or (4) imposed for an offense for which no sentencing guideline exists and is plainly unreasonable. Both the defendant and the Government have the right to appeal an imposed sentence (18 U.S.C. § 3742). Table 7. Offenders under Federal supervision This table reports the number of offenders under active supervision at the close of the fiscal year. It includes offenders under three forms of supervision: probation, supervised release, and parole. Included in parole supervisees are those under two less common types of "old law" (sentenced prior to the implementation of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984), mandatory release and special release. The unit of analysis is a unique person released on supervision. Table 8. Prisoners This table reports the number of sentenced Federal offenders committed into the custody of the BOP, released from this custody, or in Federal prison. "Into the custody of" includes prisoners in BOP facilities plus contract facilities. Contract facilities generally house offenders prior to release from prison. Sentenced offenders include felony, misdemeanor, and petty offenders sentenced to prison regardless of the judge-- U.S. district court judge or U.S. magistrate-- who sentenced the offender. The unit of analysis for the prisoner stocks is a unique person in Federal prison. The unit of count for prisoner movements is based on admissions and releases into and from Federal prison. A unique person may appear more than once in a column showing admissions and releases if that person was admitted or released from Federal prison more than once during the reporting period. Included in the counts of district court commitments are offenders sentenced from district courts. This includes some offenders sentenced by U.S. magistrates. Other admissions include offenders committed from other courts and offenders returning to prison for violations of conditions of supervised release. A first release is defined as a release from a district court commitment. Other releases include releases of offenders who were serving terms for violating conditions of supervised release -- offenders who were committed on other than a district court commitment.