U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Federal Criminal Justice Trends, 2003 Federal Justice Statistics Program August 2006, NCJ 205331 ------------------------------------------------------- This file is text only without graphics and many of the tables. A Zip archive of the tables in this report in spreadsheet format (.csv) and the full report including tables and graphics in .pdf format are available from: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/fcjt03.htm ------------------------------------------------------- Mark Motivans Jeffrey L. Sedgwick Director This Bureau of Justice Statistics Report was prepared using data from the Federal Justice Statistics Program (FJSP). The FJSP is managed by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) and the Urban Institute under BJS grant number 2005-BJ-CX- K004. Principal staff at BJS are Mark Motivans and Steven K. Smith. Principal staff at the Urban Institute are William Adams, Christine Arriola, Avi Bhati, Kamala Mallik Kane, Barbara Parthasarathy, Laura Winterfield, and Yan Yuan. Thomas H. Cohen provided statistical review. Carolyn C. Williams, Tom Hester, Marianne Zawitz, Joanna Bradford, and Rhonda Keith of BJS provided editorial review. This report is made possible through the cooperation of the following Federal agencies and their staffs: The United States Marshals Service (USMS), 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: Joe Briggs (USMS);James Tauber (DEA); Steven Schlesinger, Catherine Whitaker, and Pragati Patrick (AOUSC); Siobhan Sperin and Barbara Tone (EOUSA); and Christine Kitchens (USSC). 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 quickly obtain customized statistics. To order additional copies of this report or CD-ROMs containing the Federal Justice database, call the National Criminal Justice Reference Service at 1-800-851-3420. http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ Contents Highlights Enforcement trends Arrests and bookings for Federal offenses U.S. Marshals Service Drug Enforcement Administration Matters investigated by U.S. attorneys Immigration suspects referred to U.S. attorneys Drug suspects referred to U.S. attorneys Firearm suspects referred to U.S. attorneys Matters concluded by U.S. attorneys Prosecutions in U.S. district court Judicial and sentencing trends Pretrial release Cases filed in U.S. district court Cases terminated in U.S. district court Defendants sentenced Cases appealed Correction trends Offenders in prison Offenders on supervision Notes, 38 Methodology Table construction and interpretation Offense classifications Data sources Appendix Tables Enforcement 1. Suspects arrested for Federal offenses and booked by USMS, by offense 2. Characteristics of suspects arrested and booked by the U.S. Marshals Service 3. Characteristics of immigration suspects arrested and booked by the U.S. Marshals Service 4. Suspects arrested by Drug Enforcement Administration agents, by type of drug at arrest 5. Characteristics of suspects arrested by the Drug Enforcement Administration for all drugs and for methamphetamine 6. Suspects in criminal matters investigated by U.S. attorneys, by offense 7. Disposition of suspects in matters concluded by U.S. Attorneys Judicial and sentencing 8. Number of pretrial defendants detained at any time prior to trial by offense 9. Behavior of defendants released prior to trial by offense 10. Characteristics of defendants at initial hearing in Federal district court 11. Defendants in cases concluded in U.S. district court 12. Adjudication outcomes of defendants in cases concluded in U.S. District court 13. Type of counsel of defendants in cases concluded by offense 14. Characteristics of defendants convicted in U.S. district court 15. Defendants convicted and percent receiving prison by offense 16. Defendants receiving prison sentence and mean sentence imposed 17. Defendants receiving a probation-only sentence 18. Defendants sentenced under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines 19. Federal drug offenders receiving safety valve, 1998-2003 20. Federal offenders resentenced pursuant to Rule 35(b) 21. Criminal appeals filed in U.S. district court Corrections 22. Federal prison population at fiscal yearend by offense 23. Characteristics of the Federal prison population 24. Inmates in the Federal Bureau of Prisons by age 25. Average time served to first release from Federal prison 26. Offenders under Federal supervision, by offense 27. Characteristics of offenders under Federal supervision 28. Offenders under Federal supervision by type of supervision 29. Offenders terminating Federal supervision by outcome Methodology M. 1. Breakout of main category offenses M. 2. Source agencies for data tables in Federal Criminal Case Processing Appendix A.1. Suspects arrested for Federal offenses and booked by the USMS A.2. Suspects in criminal matters investigated by U.S. attorneys A.3. Suspects in criminal matters concluded by U.S. attorneys A.4. Suspects in criminal matters prosecuted by U.S. attorneys A.5. Suspects in criminal matters concluded by U.S. magistrates A.6. Suspects in criminal matters declined by U.S. Attorneys A.7. Defendants in cases proceeded against in U.S. district courts A.8. Defendants in cases terminating in U.S. district courts A.9. Defendants in cases terminating in U.S. district courts: Percent convicted A.10. Offenders convicted and sentenced in U.S. district courts A.11. Offenders convicted and sentenced to prison in U.S. district courts A.12. Criminal appeals filed A.13. Offenders convicted and sentenced to probation A.14. Offenders convicted and sentenced to prison: Mean number of months of imprisonment imposed Figures Enforcement 1. Suspects arrested for Federal offenses and booked by USMS, by selected offenses 2. Percent of growth in suspects arrested and booked by the U.S. Marshals by Federal judicial district 3. Suspects arrested and booked by the U.S. Marshals for an immigration offense 4. Citizenship of suspects arrested and booked by the U.S. Marshals Service 5. Country of citizenship of non-U.S. citizens arrested and booked by the U.S. Marshals 6. Drug suspects arrested by the Drug Enforcement Administration 7. Suspects arrested by the Drug Enforcement Administration for methamphetamine by State 8. Suspects referred to U.S. attorneys by selected offenses 9. Immigration suspects referred to U.S. attorneys 10. Percent of immigration matters referred to U.S. attorneys by Federal judicial district 11. Drug suspects referred to U.S. attorneys 12. Percent of drug matters referred to U.S. attorneys by Federal judicial district 13. Firearms suspects referred to U.S. Attorneys 14. Percent of firearms matters referred to U.S. attorneys by Federal judicial district 15. Suspects prosecuted, declined, disposed by U.S. Magistrates Judicial and sentencing 16. Defendants terminating pretrial services 17. Percent of growth in defendants detained prior to trial by Federal judicial district 18. Primary method of pretrial release 19. Criminal history of suspects arraigned in Federal district court 20. Percent of cases filed in U.S. district court by Federal judicial district 21. Percent of all felony cases concluded in each Federal judicial district that ended in trial 22. Type of counsel at case conclusion 23. Average prison sentence imposed by offense 24. Percent of defendants sentenced within the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines range 25. Percent of defendants sentenced within the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines by selected offenses 26. Percent of drug offenders sentenced to statutory minimum sentences 27. Percent of defendants sentenced under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines by cell 28. Percent of drug defendants sentenced receiving safety valve provision by Federal judicial district 29. Percent of defendants resentenced under Rule 35(b) by Federal judicial district 30. Criminal appeals terminated in U.S. district court by appeal type 31. Number of criminal appeals terminated 32. Outcome of criminal appeals terminated on the merits Corrections 33. Offenders under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Prisons by custody security level 34. Offenders under the jurisdiction and custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons 35. Offenders in custody with the Federal Bureau of Prisons by gender 36. Time served by inmates in Federal prison at fiscal yearend 37. Expected and actual time served among first releasees from Federal prison 38. Percent of offenders under Federal supervision by type of supervision 39. Annual average percent change in offenders under Federal supervision by type of supervision 40. Percent of growth in offenders under Federal supervision by Federal judicial district ---------------------------------------------------- Highlight Federal criminal justice trends, 1994-2003 Number of suspects/defendants increased steadily across all stages of the Federal criminal justice system Drug offenders most prevalent; immigration and weapon offenders increased most rapidly * The 10-year average annual increase was greatest for immigration (ranging from 14% for arrests to 25% for prison sentences imposed) and weapon offenses (ranging from 10% for prosecution to 11% for matters investigated by U.S. Attorneys). * Drug offenses remained the most prevalent offense across stages over 10-year period. Southwest United States produced a disproportionate share of suspects and defendants processed * Five of 94 Federal judicial districts (Southern District of California, District of Arizona, District of New Mexico and Southern and Western Districts of Texas) comprised 31% of all suspects arrested and booked, 19% of suspects investigated, 23% of defendants in cases filed in U.S. district court, and 28% of offenders sentenced to prison (1994-2003). Likelihood of prosecution, conviction, and imprisonment sentence increased * The percent of suspects prosecuted(of matters concluded by U.S. attorneys) increased from 54% in 1994 to 62% in 2003. * Eighty-nine percent of defendants were convicted in 2003 (of those charged) compared with 83% in 1994. The conviction rate for drug defendants increased from 86% in 1994 to 92% in 2003. * The percent of offenders sentenced to prison (of those convicted) increased from 65% in 1994 to 76% in 2003. Eighty-three percent of defendants convicted of a felony were sentenced to prison in 2003 compared with 78% in 1994. Rate of pretrial detention increased * Seventy-six percent of defendants terminating pretrial services in 2003 were detained compared with 58% in 1994. * Fifty-nine percent of defendants in 2003 had a prior conviction at initial hearing compared with 48% in 1994. Criminal trials declined * Jury trials decreased from 8% of cases concluded in 1994 to 4% in 2003. * Ninety-six percent of convictions in U.S. district court in 2003 were the result of guilty pleas compared with 91% in 1994. Number of Federal prison inmates increased * The Federal prison population increased an average of 7% each year from 1994-2003. The largest average annual increases over this period were for immigration (24%) and weapon offenses (10%). Drug offenders comprised 57% of prisoners in 2003 compared to 61% in 1994. * The average prison term imposed decreased from 63 months in 1994 to 59 months in 2003. The average prison term imposed declined for drug offenders from 84 months in 1994 to 82 months in 2003 and increased for violent offenders from 92 months in 1994 to 98 months in 2003. * Offenders released for the first time from Federal prison served an average of 33 months in prison in 2003 compared to 25 months in 1994. * 26% of inmates in Federal prison at fiscal yearend 2003 had served 5 years in prison up from 9% in 1994. Of those who had served 5 or more years at yearend 2003, 22% were over the age of 50. Federal sentencing guidelines applied in most cases * Sixty-nine percent of offenders sentenced in 2003 received sentences within ranges set forth under the Federal sentencing guidelines (compared with 72% in 1994). * Sixty-nine percent of immigration offenders were sentenced within the Federal sentencing guidelines in 2003 (compared with 91% in 1994). * Just over half of offenders (54%) sentenced under the Federal sentencing guidelines from 1994-2003 were assigned the lowest criminal history score level as determined by the guidelines at sentencing. * The percent of drug offenders receiving a 5-year or greater statutory minimum sentence under the Federal sentencing guidelines decreased from 66% in 1996 to 60% in 2003. Supervised release most common form of Federal community supervision * Offenders on Federal supervised release surpassed the number of offenders on probation from 1994 to 2003. Offenders on supervised release comprised 70% of offenders on community supervision in 2003 compared with 39% in 1994. * Offenders on Federal parole comprised 3% of offenders under supervision in 2003 compared with 15% in 1994. Drug offenders on Federal supervision increased * Drug offenders surpassed property offenders as most common offense under Federal supervision in 1999. Drug offenders increased from 32% of those on supervision in 1994 to 42% in 2003. * Forty percent of offenders under Federal supervision in 2003 reported a drug abuse history compared with 31% in 1994. ---------------------------------------------------- Enforcement trends Arrests and bookings by the U.S. Marshals Service Drug offenses were the most prevalent offense among suspects arrested and booked by U.S. Marshals. * Immigration offenses had the greatest net increase (18,843 more arrests in 2003 than 1994). Suspects arrested and booked by the U.S. Marshals Service increased an average of 6% annually from 1994-2003. Four Federal judicial districts along the Southwest border comprised 54% of the growth in arrests and bookings between 1994 and 2003. Illegal entry/reentry offenses comprised the bulk of U.S. Marshals Service arrests for immigration offenses. Non-U.S. citizens comprised a growing share of suspects arrested and booked by the U.S. Marshals. * In 2003 non-U.S. citizens made up 38% of suspects arrested compared to 27% in 1994. Citizens of Mexico comprised the largest share of non-U.S. citizen suspects arrested and booked by the U.S. Marshals Service from 1994 to 2003. Drug arrests by the Drug Enforcement Administration The number of drug arrests by the Drug Enforcement Administration reached a peak in 1999. Methamphetamine arrests comprised 22% of Drug Enforcement Administration arrests in 2003 compared with 11% of arrests in 1994. From 1994 to 2003 the Drug Enforcement Administration made more than 26,000 methamphetamine arrests, 44% of all domestic methamphetamine arrests, in 4 States: California, Texas, Arizona, and Missouri. * Twenty-five percent of DEA arrests for methamphetamine were in California. Demographic characteristics of suspects arrested for methamphetamine remained mostly the same between 1995 and 2003. Matters investigated by U.S. attorneys The number of suspects referred for immigration and weapons matters increased steadily from 1994-2003. * Suspects referred for drug offenses also increased and remained the most prevalent offense of referral. The number of suspects in matters referred to U.S. attorneys increased an average of 3% each year from 1994-2003. * Suspects referred for property offenses declined an annual average of 2%. Immigration suspects referred to U.S. attorneys The number of suspects investigated for illegal reentry increased more than other types of immigration offenses. Sixty-three percent of immigration matters referred to U.S. attorneys from 1994-2003 were from the five Federal judicial districts along the U.S.-Mexico border. Drug suspects referred to U.S. attorneys The number of suspects investigated for trafficking increased more than conspiracy and other drug offenses. Five Federal judicial districts comprised 26% of all drug suspects referred to U.S. Attorneys from 1994 to 2003. Firearm suspects referred to U.S. Attorneys Investigations of firearm suspects increased an annual average of 11% from 1994-2003. * Suspects referred for firearm possession comprised 90% of firearm referrals in 2003 compared with 64% in 1994. Six Federal judicial districts each comprised 3% or more of all suspects investigated for firearm matters from 1994 to 2003. Matters concluded by U.S. attorneys U.S. attorneys prosecuted 80,106 suspects in 2003 compared to 50,802 in 1994. * Matters concluded by U.S. magistrate increased by a yearly average of 6% from 1994-2003. Sixty-two percent of suspects were prosecuted by U.S. attorneys in 2003, up from 54% in 1994. * The median time from receipt of a matter to its disposition (prosecution, declination, disposal by U.S. magistrate)decreased from just over 3 months in 1994 to less than 2 months in 2003. * The number of suspects in matters declined decreased from 36% of matters concluded in 1994 to 26% in 2003. Judicial and sentencing trends I. Initial hearing/Pretrial release The number of defendants terminating pretrial services increased by an average of 6% each year from 1994 to 2003. The number of defendants detained at anytime prior to trial increased by an annual average of 9%. * Nearly a third of detained defendants terminating pretrial services were charged with a drug offense. * Defendants charged with immigration offenses had the largest increase of those receiving pretrial detention. * The percent of defendants detained prior to case termination increased from 58% in 1994 to 76% by 2003. Five Federal judicial districts along the Southwest U.S. border comprised 48% of the growth in persons detained at any time prior to trial from 1994 to 2003. Unsecured bond remained the primary method of release for defendants released any time prior to case disposition during the 1994-2003 period. A greater percentage of defendants released prior to trial violated a condition of their release (technical violation, new crime, failure to appear) in 2003 (20%) compared with 1994 (15%). Most defendants in pretrial cases commenced from 1994-2003 had a prior conviction. * The proportion of pretrial defendants with a prior conviction at initial hearing has been increasing. The characteristics of defendants with a prior conviction varied modestly from all offenders. II. Cases filed and terminated in U.S. district court From 1994 to 2003, 23% of criminal cases were filed in Federal judicial districts along the Southwest U.S. Border Defendants in criminal cases concluded in U.S. district court increased at a yearly average of 4% from 1994 to 2003 with immigration offenses increasing at the greatest rate. * The percent of defendants convicted increased for all types of felonies. Three Federal judicial districts had a trial rate (percent of bench or jury trials of all concluded cases) that was more than double the national average of 6% from 1994-2003. Three districts had a trial rate that was less than half the national average. The proportion of all defendants convicted in the Federal courts increased from 83% during 1994 to 89% in 2003. * The median case processing time from case filing to disposition increased from 5 months in 1994 to 6 months in 2003. * Cases concluded before a jury declined from 4,639 in 1994 to 2,909 in 2003. In 2003 the most common types of counsel at case termination were public defender and Criminal Justice Act appointed counsel. Type of counsel at case termination varied by type of offense: * In 2003 more than 40% of the caseload for Criminal Justice Act-appointed and private counsel was made up of drug offenses. * Immigration offenses comprised almost one-third of the caseload for public defenders in 2003. Defendants convicted in U.S. District courts in 1996 differed from those convicted in 2003. III. Defendants sentenced Seventy-six percent of sentenced defendants received some imprisonment in 2003 compared with 65% in 1994. * The percent of sentenced defendants receiving a prison sentence increased across all felony offenses for the 10-year period. During 2003 the average prison sentence was greatest for violent (98 months), weapons (84 months), and drug offenders (82 months). The average prison sentence imposed decreased from 63 months in 1994 to 59 months in 2003. * The number of defendants sentenced to prison increased at a yearly average of 7% over the 10-year period. Probation-only sentences imposed decreased at an annual average of 1% across the 10-year period. Most Federal judicial districts (81 out of 94) sentenced defendants within the ranges determined by the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines at least 60% of the time from 1994-2003. Defendants convicted and sentenced for property and violent offenses were more likely to be sentenced within the ranges determined by the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines than defendants convicted of drug or immigration offenses from 1994-2003. * The percent of immigration offenders sentenced within the guidelines decreased from 91% in 1994 to 69% in 2003. Sixty-nine percent of defendants sentenced in 2003 received sentences within ranges set forth under the Federal sentencing guidelines (compared with 72% in 1994). * Substantial assistance departures (where a defendant receives a reduction in the guideline sentence for assisting the Government) comprised 16% of sentences in 2003 compared with 20% in 1994. * One percent or less of defendants sentenced between 1994 and 2003 received an upward departure (where a defendant receives a more severe sentence due to aggravating factors). The percent of drug offenders sentenced who received a statutory minimum sentence of 5 years or more under the Federal sentencing guidelines decreased from 66% in 1996 to 60% in 2003. Just over half (54%) of defendants sentenced under the Federal sentencing guidelines from 1994-2003 were assigned the lowest criminal history score level as determined by the guidelines at sentencing. The safety valve provision permits the court to impose a sentence without regard to the statutory drug minimum taking into account the defendant's criminal history, role in offense and cooperation with authorities as well as whether offense involved death/injury, weapons or violence (see: 18 U.S.C. sec. 3553(f)). Drug defendants in 3 Federal judicial districts received the safety valve provision at nearly double the national rate of 30%. The safety valve provision was increasingly used for drug offenders over this period: 38% of drug defendants received the safety valve provision in 2003 compared with 25% in 1998. Some offenders assisting the Government in investigations and prosecution of others met the criteria for a reduction in sentence under Rule 35(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. * Twenty-nine percent of Rule 35(b) defendant resentencings from 1992 to 2001 occurred in four Federal judicial districts. Between 1992 and 2001, average sentence length reductions for prisoners resentenced under Rule 35(b) ranged from 36% to 43%. IV. Cases appealed Guideline-based appeals comprised 85% of appeals terminated from 1994-2003. Criminal appeals increased an annual average of 2% from 1994-2003 with the bulk of this growth occurring among appellants with an immigration offense as the most serious offense of conviction. * The rate of appeals per 100 convictions decreased from 21 appeals per 100 convictions in 1994 to 16 appeals per 100 convictions in 2003. * The rate of appeals for drug offenses decreased the most over this period. Most criminal appeals terminated from 1994 to 2003 (77%) were terminated on the merits of the case; and, of these, the majority (85%) affirmed the decision of the lower court in whole or in part. Corrections trends I. Offenders in the custody and under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Prisons Most offenders under the jurisdiction of the Federal Bureau of Prisons were classified as medium or Low custody from 1995-2003. Offenders under the jurisdiction and in custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons increased at similar rates from 1994 to 2003-an average annual rate of 7%. II. Offenders in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons Drug offenders comprised 57% of the Federal prison population in 2003 compared with 61% in 1994. Immigration (24%) and weapon offenders (10%) increased at the greatest rate from 1994 to 2003. Characteristics of the Federal prison population changed moderately from 1994 to 2003. Male offenders comprised 93% of inmates in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons in 2003 and increased an annual average of 7% from 1994 to 2003; females comprised 7% of inmates in 2003 and increased by an annual average of 6% from 1994 to 2003. Twenty-six percent of offenders in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons in 2003 had been incarcerated more than 5 years compared with 9% of offenders in 1994. Inmates 50 years and older comprised 13% of the population in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons and 22% of the inmates who had served 5 years or more at fiscal yearend 2003. Expected time to be served in Federal prison increased an average of 5% each year (1987-2003) from 23 months in 1987 to 48 months in 2003. * Actual time served also increased an average of 5% each year over the same period from 15 months in 1987 to 33 months in 2003. Expected time to be served in Federal prison increased an average of 5% each year (1987-2003) from 23 months in 1987 to 48 months in 2003. Of offenders who had been released from Federal prison for the first time, the average prison time served was 33 months in 2003 compared with 25 months in 1994. * Increases in average time served were greatest for weapon offenders followed by immigration, and drug offenders. III. Offenders on Federal supervision The number of offenders on supervision (probation, supervised release, and parole) increased an average of 3% per year from 1994 to 2003. * More than two of three offenders on Federal supervision in 2003 were on supervised release. Drug offenses surpassed property offenses as most common offense of offenders under Federal supervision. * Forty-two percent of defendants under supervision were convicted of drug offenses in 2003 compared with 32% in 1994. Offenders under supervised release increased at an average annual rate of 9% between 1994 and 2003. Characteristics of offenders under Federal supervision from 1994-2003 varied by type of supervision. For example, 23% of offenders on probation at yearend 2003 had a known drug history compared to 47% of offenders on supervised release and 44% of offenders on parole. Drug offenders under Federal supervision increased from 30,198 in 1994 to 47,826 in 2003. Five Federal judicial districts along the Southwest U.S. border and the Central district of California comprised 32% of the growth in offenders under Federal supervision from 1994 to 2003. Parolees were more likely to violate conditions of supervision (technical violation, new crime) than offenders on supervised release or probation in 2003. Notes Figure notes Figure 1, p. 1. Shows the top five offenses in terms of net and percent growth in suspects arrested and booked by the U.S. Marshals Service from 1994-2003. Source: U.S. Marshals Service, Prisoner Tracking System, fiscal year. Figure 2, p. 2. The following districts are not shown on map: District of Columbia (2-6%); Puerto Rico (<1%); Guam (<1%); Virgin Islands (<1%); Northern Mariana Islands (<1%). The Western District of North Carolina did not report arrests in 1994. The map shows the percent distribution of the net increase in arrests between 1994 and 2003 (50,334) by Federal judicial district. Percentages shown are rounded. Source: U.S. Marshals Service, Prisoner Tracking System, fiscal year. Figure 3, p. 3. Source: U.S. Marshals Service, Prisoner Tracking System, fiscal year. Figure 4, p. 4. Citizenship status was missing in 13% of cases in 1994, 9% in 1998, and 7% in 2003. Yearly average of 9% missing citizenship status (1994-2003). Source: U.S. Marshals Service, Prisoner Tracking System, fiscal year. Figure 5, p. 4. A total of 1,044,078 suspects were arrested and booked by U.S. Marshals from 1994-2003. Of these, 9% were missing country of citizenship (948,077). Of cases with country of citizenship, 35% were non-U.S. Citizens. These 327,825 arrests are displayed by country of citizenship in map. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Source: U.S. Marshals Service, Prisoner Tracking System, fiscal year. Figure 6, p. 5. Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Defendant Statistical System, fiscal year. Figure 7, p. 6. Percent distribution based on total number of methamphetamine arrests by the Drug Enforcement Administration (N=59,903) by State. Not shown on map: Alaska (0.2%); Guam (0.4%); Hawaii (1.3%); Virgin Islands, and Puerto Rico (each < 0.1%). Source: Drug Enforcement Administration Defendant Statistical System, fiscal year. Figure 8, p. 7. Matters referred to U.S. attorneys by selected offenses. A matter is a referral that an assistant U.S. attorney spends more than 1 hour investigating. The most serious offense investigated is based on the criminal lead charge as determined by the assistant U.S. attorney for the criminal matter. Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Central System File, fiscal year. Figure 9, p. 8. Illegal reentry includes: 8 U.S.C. § 1326; Illegal entry 8 U.S.C. § 1325; alien smuggling 8 U.S.C. §§ 1322-1324, 8 U.S.C. § 1327; and misuse of visas 18 U.S.C. § 1546, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252-1253, 8 U.S.C. §§ 1321 (lead charge). Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Central System File, fiscal year. Figure 10, p. 8. Percent distribution based on total number of immigration (as lead charge) matters referred to U.S. attorneys from 1994-2003 (N=127,550) by Federal judicial district. Not shown on map: District of Columbia, Guam, Northern Mariana Islands, Puerto Rico, and Virgin Islands (each representing less than 1%). Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Central System File, fiscal year. Figure 11, p. 9. Drug trafficking includes: 21 U.S.C. § 841 and 21 U.S.C § 960; Conspiracy includes: 21 U.S.C. § 846 & 21 U.S.C § 963; "Other drug offenses" include: drug possession, protected location offenses, manufacturing offenses, continuing criminal enterprise offenses, sale/importation of drug paraphernalia, and transhipment of controlled substances (lead charge). Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Central System File, fiscal year. Figure 12, p. 9. Percent distribution based on number of drug matters referred to U.S. attorneys (as lead charge) from 1994-2003 with non-missing data (350,215) by Federal judicial district. Not shown on map: Puerto Rico (1.4%); District of Columbia (1.1%); Virgin Islands and Northern Mariana Islands (each < 1%). Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Central System File, fiscal year. Figure 13, p. 10. The following statutes were used to classify firearms into three categories: 18 U.S.C. §§ 922-924; 18 U.S.C §§ 929-930, 26 U.S.C § 5812, 26 U.S.C § 5822, 26 U.S.C § 5841, 26 U.S.C § 5842, 26 U.S.C § 5861 (lead charge). See Appendix Table 3 in Federal Firearm Offenders, 1992-98 (BJS Special Report, NCJ 180795, 2000). Note: Firearms matters are a subset of weapon referrals shown in Table 6. Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Central System File, fiscal year. Figure 14 , p. 10. Percent distribution based on number of firearm (as lead charge) matters referred to U.S. attorneys from 1994 to 2003 with non-missing data (75,135) by Federal judicial district. Not shown on map: District of Columbia (2%); Guam, Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, Northern Mariana Islands (each < 1%). Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Central System File, fiscal year. Figure 15, p. 11. Excludes matters which were declined immediately. Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Central System File, fiscal year. Figure 16, p. 12. Includes defendants who terminated pretrial services during fiscal years 1994-2003. Includes only those defendants whose cases were filed by complaint, indictment, or information. Source: Pretrial Services Agency, Pretrial Services Act Information System, fiscal year. Figure 17, p. 13. The following districts are not shown: Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands, and Northern Mariana Islands (each <1%). Based on net increase in pretrial detention between 1994 and 2003 (31,557). The percent distribution of this net difference is shown by Federal judicial district. Source: Pretrial Services Agency, Pretrial Services Act Information System data base, fiscal year. Figure 18, p. 13. Includes defendants released prior to trial during the fiscal year. Source: Pretrial Services Agency, Pretrial Services Act Information System, fiscal year. Figure 19, p. 15. Includes defendants who had an initial hearing in U.S. district court from 1994-2003. Prior criminal history is determined only for those defendants whose PSA records explicitly showed no prior conviction. Source: Pretrial Services Agency, Pretrial Services Act Information System, fiscal year. Figure 20, p. 16. Shows the percent distribution of cases filed calculated by summing the number of cases filed in each district and displaying the percent contribution to the overall total by Federal judicial district. The following districts are not shown: Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, and the District of Columbia (comprising 3% of all cases filed). Percents are rounded. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Figure 21, p. 17. The trial rate is computed for each district by dividing the number of cases concluded in which a bench or jury trial occurred into the total number of cases concluded in that district. The following districts are not shown: Puerto Rico, Guam, Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands, and the District of Columbia (trial rates range from 6% to 12%). The displayed percent is rounded. The District of Columbia had a trial rate of 12%. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Figure 22, p. 18. Type of counsel at the time of case termination. A total of 4% of cases concluded from 1994-2003 were missing type of counsel. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Figure 23, p 20. Average prison sentence imposed on defendants convicted and sentenced to any prison term during the fiscal year. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Figure 24, p. 22. Map shows the rate at which a Federal judicial district imposed sentences within ranges as determined by the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. The rate is computed by dividing the number of sentences that were within guideline range by the total number of sentences imposed during fiscal years 1994-2003 (based on non-missing data). The following districts were missing 5% or more of departure information: C. District of CA (38%); E. District of VA (25%); S. District of CA (18%); E. District of NY (15%); W. District of WA (16%); District of UT (15%): District of OR (11%); M. District of TN (10%); M. District of GA (10%); District of GU (9%); W. District of NC (9%); M. District of AL (8%); W. District of KY (8%); S. District of NY (7%); N. District of CA (8%); District of CO (7%); N. District of NY (7%); S. District of FL (7%); District of PR (7%); S. District of GA (6%); N. District of IN 6%); and, N. District of IL (5%). Overall, 6% of cases from 1994-2003 were missing departure information. The displayed percent is rounded. Source: U.S. Sentencing Commission, Monitoring Data Base. Figure 25, p. 22. Percent of defendants sentenced within ranges determined by the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines based on non-missing data. A maximum of 9% of cases were missing departure information for a particular year. Source: U.S. Sentencing Commission, Monitoring Data Base. Figure 26, p. 23. Includes defendants sentenced under Chapter 2, Part D of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines: Trafficking, protected locations, continuing criminal enterprise, communications facility, rent/manage drug establishment, and simple possession. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Less than 1% of cases missing information on mandatory-minimum sentence. Source: U.S. Sentencing Commission, Monitoring Data Base. Figure 27, p. 24. Figure depicts the sentencing grid used to determine sentence imposed. Along the vertical axis are 43 offense levels which are ranked in terms of severity of offense from least (1) to most (43). Each Federal offense is associated with an offense severity score. The offense level is subject to modification depending upon aggravating and mitigating factors. The horizontal axis shows the defendant's criminal history score. A criminal history score of 1 corresponds to the mildest criminal history (including no prior convictions/arrests). The criminal history score increases with the magnitude and/or seriousness of the defendant's prior criminal history. The sentencing grid (shown in figure) is used to locate the cell corresponding to the defendant's final offense severity score and criminal history score. A frequency of the final cell used to determine the defendant's sentence was generated for all defendants sentenced under the Federal guidelines from 1994 to 2003. This distribution is shown in figure. For example, 3% of all defendants sentenced under the guidelines from 1994 to 2003 were sentenced in the cell corresponding to an offense severity score of 6 and a criminal history score of 1. Darker shading refers to cells with a relatively greater share of the total percent of sentences imposed across this 10-year period. Lighter shading refers to cells with a relatively lesser share of the total sentences imposed. Of 530,433 defendants sentenced, 31,727 were missing information on offense severity/criminal history score. A small share of defendants were sentenced under more than one guideline and are not displayed. There were a total of 498,706 cases with complete information on final criminal history score and offense severity score. Source: U.S. Sentencing Commission, Monitoring Data Base. Figure 28, p. 25. Map shows the rate for each Federal judicial district of sentenced drug offenders who received a safety valve provision. For example Title 18 §3553(f), provides for relief from statutory minimum sentences with 1) Government's recommendation and 2) if the defendant meets the following criteria: no more than 1 criminal history point, no use of violence or credible threats of violence or possess a firearm or other dangerous weapon in connection with offense; offense did not result in death or serious bodily injury to any person; defendant was not an organizer, leader, manager, or supervisor of others in the offense and was not engaged in continuing criminal enterprise; defendant has truthfully provided to the Government. Percents based on non-missing data. Missing ranged from 6% of cases in 1994 to 12% in 2003 (missing safety valve and/or complete guideline application information). Source: U.S. Sentencing Commission, Monitoring Data Base. Figure 29, p. 26. The map shows the distribution of resentencing under Rule 35(b) by Federal judicial district. Rule 35(b) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure permits the reduction of sentence for substantial assistance to the Government. Upon the Government's motion within 1 year of sentencing, the court may reduce the offender's sentence if the offender provided substantial assistance in the investigation or prosecution of another person and that the reduction in sentence complies with the Federal sentencing guidelines and policy statement by the U.S. Sentencing Commission. The Government may make a motion more than 1 year after sentencing to reduce the sentence of an offender if the information wasn't known to the defendant 1 year or more after sentencing or the information provided to the Government within 1 year of sentencing did not become useful to the Government until more than 1 year after sentencing. Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP), online Sentry System. Figure 30, p.27. Figure excludes other guideline based appeals. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Appeals database. Figure 31, p. 28. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Appeals database. Figure 32, p. 28. Figure excludes other dispositions. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Appeals database. Figure 33, p. 29. The number of offenders under BOP jurisdiction in 1994 is for period ending Dec. 31st. Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons as reported in Prisoners in 1994, BJS Bulletin . The number of offenders under BOP jurisdiction from 1995-2003 is for period ending Sept. 30th. Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons, State of the Bureau, . The number of offenders under BOP custody from 1994-2003 is for period ending Sept. 30th. Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons as reported in the Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, . Figure 34, p. 29. Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons, online Sentry System. Figure 35, p. 31. Data include offenders sentenced in Federal courts (excludes persons committed by the D.C. Superior Court). Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons, online Sentry System. Figure 36, p. 32. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Data include offenders sentenced in Federal courts (excludes persons committed by the D.C. Superior Court). Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons, online Sentry System. Figure 37, p. 33. Time served calculated from prisoner's arrival into BOP jurisdiction until first release from prison, plus any jail time served and credited. Note: Beginning in 2000, average time served is calculated for offenders in BOP custody and offenders in contract and private facilities, but not those committed for violations of the District of Columbia criminal code. Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons, online Sentry System, fiscal year. Figure 38, p. 34. Note: Data for 1987 through 1994 are based on a count of the supervised population as of June 30. Beginning in 1995 data are based on a count as of September 30. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Federal Probation and Supervision Information System (FPSIS), fiscal year. Figure 39, p. 35. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Federal Probation and Supervision Information System, fiscal year. Figure 40, p. 37. The difference was taken between the number of inmates under Federal supervision at fiscal yearend 1994 and in 2003. This difference provides the net growth for offenders under Federal supervision between 1994 and 2003 and the percent distribution of the net growth is displayed by Federal judicial district on the map. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Federal Probation and Supervision Information System, fiscal year. Table notes Table 1, p. 1. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Missing comprised less than 1% for each year. Source: U.S. Marshals Service (USMS) Prisoner Tracking System (PTS), fiscal year. Table 2, p. 2. Percentages based on non-missing cases. In 1994 the following were missing: citizenship (13%), and gender, age, and race (each <2%). In 2003 missing included citizenship Notes (7%) and gender, age, and race (each <2%). Source: U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), Prisoner Tracking System. Table 3, p. 3. Percentages based on non-missing cases. In 1994 missing included citizenship (6%), and gender, age and race (each <1%). In 2003 missing included citizenship (5%), and gender, age, and race (<1%). Information on suspect ethnicity not available. Source: U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), Prisoner Tracking System. Table 4, p. 5. Other or non-drug includes paraphernalia and other items. Source: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Defendant Statistical System. Table 5, p. 6. Percentages based on non-missing cases. The following describes the maximum missing data for each variable across offense categories: sex (<1%), race (< 4%), ethnic (< 9%), age (<2%), and citizenship (<6%). 1995 is the base year due to missing demographic data for 1994. Source: Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Defendant Statistical System. Table 6, p. 7. Percentages based on non-missing cases. About 1% of cases each year are missing offense information. Source: Executive Office for the U.S. Attorney, Central System File. Table 7, p. 11. Only records which show a matter terminated by reason of declination, disposition by a U.S. Magistrate, or filed as a case in U.S. district court were selected. Matters "declined immediately" C those cases in which the U.S. attorney spent less than 1 hour investigating C were excluded. Source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, Central System File, fiscal year. Table 8, p. 12. Detained defendants included defendants who were detained at any time prior to case termination. Totals include defendants whose offense category could not be determined. Source: Pretrial Services Agency, Pretrial Services Act Information System, fiscal year. Table 9, p. 14. Total includes defendants whose offense category could not be determined. Source: Pretrial Services Agency, Pretrial Services Act Information System, fiscal year. Table 10, p. 15. Source: Pretrial Services Agency, Pretrial Services Act Information System, fiscal year. Table 11, p. 16. Most serious offense is based on the offense carrying the maximum statutory penalty. Includes defendants whose offense category could not be determined. See Methodology for a listing of detailed offense categories within each major offense category. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Table 12, p. 17. Case processing time is computed from case filing to disposition. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Table 13, p. 18. Note: Most serious offense is based on the disposition offense with the most severe sentence. Includes offenders whose offense category could not be determined or whose sentence was unknown. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Table 14, p. 19. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Offender characteristics could not be determined for 16%-20% of defendants across characteristics in 1996. In 2003 missing information comprised less than 1% across characteristics. Table was created by matching the AOUSC master data files with the U.S. Senten-cing Commission (USSC) monitoring system files and the Pretrial Services Agency (PSA) data files. Source: Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, . Table 15, p. 20. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Missing data comprised less than 1% for each year. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Table 16, p. 21. Note: Most serious offense is based on the disposition offense with the most severe sentence. Includes offenders whose offense category could not be determined or whose sentence was unknown. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Table 17, p. 21. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Table 18, p. 23. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Four percent of cases sentenced in 1994 were missing departure information and/or offenses information. In 2003, 8% of cases were missing departure and/or offense information. Downward departure category includes Government-initiated departures. Source: U.S. Sentencing Commission, Monitoring Data Base. Table 19, p. 25. Percents are based on non-missing data. Includes defendants sentenced under Chapter 2, Part D of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines: Trafficking, protected locations, continuing criminal enterprise, communications facility, rent/manage drug establishment, and simple possession. Six percent of cases in 1994 were missing safety valve and/or complete guideline application information. In 2003 12% of cases were missing safety valve and/or guideline application information. Source: U.S. Sentencing Commission, Monitoring Data Base. Table 20, p. 26. Source: Database with special data set covering all prisoner admissions 1986-1997 and subsequently updated with annual Federal Bureau of Prisons, online Sentry System to capture resentencing. Table 21, p. 27. Offenses represent the statutory offense of conviction against a defendant in a criminal appeal. Includes offenders whose offense category could not be determined. Number of defendants Notes convicted derived from 1994 and 2003 defendants in cases terminated. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Court of Appeals File and Criminal Master File, fiscal year. Table 22, p. 30. Data includes only offenders sentenced in Federal court. Total includes prisoners whose offense category could not be determined. Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons, online Sentry System, fiscal year. Table 23, p. 31. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Data includes only offenders sentenced in Federal court. Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons, online Sentry System, fiscal year. Table 24, p. 32. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Data includes only offenders sentenced in Federal court. Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons, online Sentry System, fiscal year. Table 25, p. 33. Note: Most serious offense is based on the offense having the longest sentence. Starting in 2000 the universe for this table includes offenders in BOP custody and offenders in contract and private facilities, but not those committed for violations of the District of Columbia criminal code. Includes prisoners whose offense category could not be determined. Source: Federal Bureau of Prisons, online Sentry System, fiscal year. Table 26, p. 34. Most serious offense of conviction is based on the offense with the longest sentence imposed. Includes offenders under the three major forms of supervision: probation, supervised release, and parole. Includes offenders whose offense category could not be determined. Excludes organizational defendants. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Federal Probation and Supervision Information System. Table 27, p. 35. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Excludes organizational defendants. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Federal Probation and Supervision Information System. Table 28, p. 36. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Excludes organizational defendants. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Federal Probation and Supervision Information System. Table 29, p. 37. Percentages based on non-missing cases. Excludes organizational defendants. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Federal Probation and Supervision Information System. Methodology The Federal justice database The source of data for all tables in Federal Criminal Justice Trends is the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) Federal justice database. The database is constructed from source files provided by the U.S. Marshals Service (USMS), the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys (EOUSA), the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOUSC), the United States Sentencing Commission (USSC), 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). The universe of the BJS Federal justice database includes criminal suspects investigated for violations of Federal criminal law, criminal suspects arrested for violations of Federal criminal law, defendants in Federal pretrial cases opened, defendants in cases filed in U.S. district courts, and offenders entering Federal corrections and correctional supervision. Wherever possible matters or cases were selected based on an event that occurred during each fiscal year (October 1 through September 30) from 1994 through 2003. 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 (see Compendium of Federal Justice Statistics, 2003 (NCJ 210299) available on-line from the Bureau of Justice Statistics website. 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 have a maximum penalty of 1 year or less. Offenses in the tables are classified, at the most general level, into felony and misdemeanor categories. Felonies are divided into six main level offense classifications: violent, property, drug, public-order, weapon and immigration offenses. Property and public-order offenses have two sub-levels. The main-level and sub-group categories are composed of individual offense types. When possible drug offenses are divided into the individual offense level. "Other public-order offenses" include detail at the individual offense type level. Table M.1 shows a list of specific offenses under each offense category. End of file 08/30/06 ih