Pretrial Decision-Making Matrices: The Role of Risk and Charge Weighting in Risk Assessment

Abstract

Pretrial risk assessments are used in local pretrial settings to inform release and supervision decisions. Yet, there is little research on the implementation of pretrial risk assessments in practice. We examined the characteristics of pretrial decision-making matrices in a statewide sample of counties using the same risk assessment tool. We procured pretrial decision-making matrices from 29 Indiana counties that had received or were in the process of receiving pretrial certification (88.6% response rate). Using a structured coding protocol, we found matrices shared common features but differed in their structure and available release and supervision options. Matrices weighted index charge information more heavily than risk assessment information, suggesting risk assessments likely explain between 20% and 36% of variability in decisions given typical rates of judicial adherence. Local decision-makers should be aware that structuring matrices to weight charge information more heavily than risk assessment information may limit the risk management potential of these tools.

Keywords

pretrial risk assessment pretrial release decisions pretrial reform pretrial decision matrices judicial discretion

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Advancing Pretrial Policy & Research. (2022a). Guide to the release conditions matrix. https://advancingpretrial.org/guide/guide-to-the-release-condition-matrix/

Advancing Pretrial Policy & Research. (2022b). Pretrial supervision training: Supportive services. https://advancingpretrial.org/announcement/pretrial-supervision-training-supportive-services/

American Bar Association. (2007). ABA standards for criminal justice: Pretrial release (3rd ed.). https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/publications/criminal_justice_standards/pretrial_release.authcheckdam.pdf

Arnold

Dobbie

Yang

C. S.

(2018). Racial bias in bail decisions. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 133(4), 1885–1932. https://doi.org/10.1093/qje/qjy012

Berk

Heidari

Jabbari

Kearns

Roth

(2021). Fairness in criminal justice risk assessments: The state of the art. Sociological Methods & Research, 50(1), 3–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124118782533

Bogue

Woodward

Joplin

(2006). Using a proxy score to pre-screen offenders for risk to reoffend. https://docplayer.net/20746483-Using-a-proxy-score-to-pre-screen-offenders-for-risk-to-reoffend-february-1-2006-brad-bogue-william-woodward-lore-joplin.html

Bureau of Justice Assistance. (n.d.). Structured decision-making. Pretrial: Public Safety Risk Assessment Clearinghouse. https://bja.ojp.gov/program/psrac/implementation/structured-decision-making/pretrial

Campbell

C. M.

Labrecque

R. M.

Weinerman

Sanchagrin

(2020). Gauging detention dosage: Assessing the impact of pretrial detention on sentencing outcomes using propensity score modeling. Journal of Criminal Justice, 70, Article 101719. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2020.101719

Casey

Elek

(2015). A snapshot of pretrial reform activity across the nation. National Center for State Courts’ Pretrial Justice Center for Courts. https://www.ncsc.org/__data/assets/pdf_file/0022/1588/pretrial-snapshot-revised-3-15.ashx.pdf

10.

Cohen

T. H.

Lowenkamp

C. T.

Bechtel

Flores

A. W.

(2020). Risk assessment overrides: Shuffling the risk deck without any improvements in prediction. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(12), 1609–1629. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820953449

11.

Cooprider

(2009). Pretrial risk assessment and case classification: A case study. Federal Probation, 73(1), 12–22. https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/fed_probation_june_2009.pdf

12.

Copp

J. E.

Casey

Blomberg

T. G.

Pesta

(2022). Pretrial risk assessment instruments in practice: The role of judicial discretion in pretrial reform. Criminology & Public Policy, 21(2), 329–358. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12575

13.

Danner

M. J. E.

VanNostrand

Spruance

L. M.

(2015). Risk-based pretrial release recommendations and supervision guidelines. Luminosity. https://www.dcjs.virginia.gov/sites/dcjs.virginia.gov/files/publications/corrections/risk-based-pretrial-release-recommendation-and-supervision-guidelines.pdf

14.

DeMichele

Baumgartner

Barrick

Comfort

Scaggs

Misra

(2019). What do criminal justice professionals think about risk assessment at pretrial. Federal Probation, 83(1), 32–41. https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/fedprobation-june2019_0.pdf

15.

DeMichele

Baumgartner

Wenger

Barrick

Comfort

(2020). Public safety assessment: Predictive utility and differential prediction by race in Kentucky. Criminology & Public Policy, 19(2), 409–431. https://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12481

16.

Demuth

(2003). Racial and ethnic differences in pretrial release decisions and outcomes: A comparison of Hispanic, Black, and White felony arrestees. Criminology, 41(3), 873–908. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9125.2003.tb01007.x

17.

Demuth

Steffensmeier

(2004). The impact of gender and race-ethnicity in the pretrial release process. Social Problems, 51(2), 222–242. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.2004.51.2.222

18.

Desmarais

S. L.

Lowder

E. M.

(2019). Pretrial risk assessment tools: A primer for judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys. Safety and Justice Challenge, MacArthur Foundation. https://safetyandjusticechallenge.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Pretrial-Risk-Assessment-Primer-February-2019.pdf

19.

Desmarais

S. L.

Monahan

Austin

(2021). The empirical case for pretrial risk assessment instruments. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 49(6), 807–816. https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211041651

20.

Desmarais

S. L.

Zottola

S. A.

Duhart Clarke

S. E.

Lowder

E. M.

(2020). Predictive validity of pretrial risk assessments: A systematic review of the literature. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 48(4), 398–420. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820932959

21.

Digard

Swavola

(2019). Justice denied: The harmful and lasting effects of pretrial detention [Vera Evidence Brief]. Vera Institute of Justice. https://www.vera.org/downloads/publications/Justice-Denied-Evidence-Brief.pdf

22.

Dobbie

Goldin

Yang

C. S.

(2018). The effects of pre-trial detention on conviction, future crime, and employment: Evidence from randomly assigned judges. American Economic Review, 108(2), 201–240. https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.20161503

23.

Fellner

(2010). The price of freedom: Bail and pretrial detention of low income nonfelony defendants in New York City. Human Rights Watch. https://www.hrw.org/report/2010/12/03/price-freedom/bail-and-pretrial-detention-low-income-nonfelony-defendants-new

24.

Garrett

B. L.

Monahan

(2020). Judging risk. California Law Review, 108(2), 439–494. https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38B56D515

25.

Gupta

Hansman

Frenchman

(2016). The heavy costs of high bail: Evidence from judge randomization. The Journal of Legal Studies, 45(2), 471–505. https://doi.org/10.1086/688907

26.

Hart

S. D.

Douglas

K. S.

Guy

L. S.

(2017). The structured professional judgement approach to violence risk assessment: Origins, nature, and advances. In Boer

D. P.

(Ed.), The Wiley handbook on the theories, assessment, and treatment of sexual offending (Vols. 1–3, pp. 643–666). Wiley-Blackwell.

27.

Heaton

Mayson

Stevenson

(2017). The downstream consequences of misdemeanor pretrial detention. Stanford Law Review, 69(3), 711–794. https://www.stanfordlawreview.org/print/article/the-downstream-consequences-of-misdemeanor-pretrial-detention/

28.

Judicial Conference of Indiana. (2019). Pretrial services rules. Indiana Office of Court Services. https://secure.in.gov/courts/iocs/files/iocs-pretrial-services-rules.pdf

29.

König

P. D.

Krafft

T. D.

(2021). Evaluating the evidence in algorithmic evidence-based decision-making: The case of U.S. pretrial risk assessment tools. Current Issues in Criminal Justice, 33(3), 359–381. https://doi.org/10.1080/10345329.2020.1849932

30.

Kurlychek

M. C.

Johnson

B. D.

(2019). Cumulative disadvantage in the American criminal justice system. Annual Review of Criminology, 2, 291–319. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-criminol-011518-024815

31.

Latessa

E. J.

Lovins

Makorios

(2013). Validation of the Indiana Risk Assessment System: Final report. Center for Criminal Justice Research, School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati. https://www.in.gov/courts/iocs/files/prob-risk-iras-final.pdf

32.

Latessa

E. J.

Smith

Lemke

Makarios

Lowenkamp

C. T.

(2009). Creation and validation of the Ohio Risk Assessment System: Final report. Center for Criminal Justice Research, School of Criminal Justice, University of Cincinnati. http://www.uc.edu/content/dam/uc/ccjr/docs/reports/project_reports/ORAS_Final_Report.pdf

33.

Lattimore

P. K.

Tueller

Levin-Rector

Witwer

(2020). The prevalence of local criminal justice practices. Federal Probation, 84(1), 28–37. https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/fedprobation-june2020.pdf

34.

Laura and John Arnold Foundation. (2014). Results from the first six months of the Public Safety Assessment—Court in Kentucky.

35.

Lawson

S. G.

Rising

S. J.

Grommon

Lowder

E. M.

(2021). Pretrial risk assessment tool adoption and pretrial operations. In Scott-Hayward

C. S.

Copp

J. E.

Demuth

(Eds.), Handbook on pretrial justice (pp. 276–295). Routledge.

36.

Leslie

Pope

N. G.

(2017). The unintended impact of pretrial detention on case outcomes: Evidence from New York City arraignments. The Journal of Law and Economics, 60(3), 529–557. https://doi.org/10.1086/695285

37.

Lowder

E. M.

Diaz

C. L.

Grommon

Ray

B. R.

(2021). Effects of pretrial risk assessments on release decisions and misconduct outcomes relative to practice as usual. Journal of Criminal Justice, 73, Article 101754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2020.101754

38.

Lowder

E. M.

Foudray

C. M. A.

(2021). Use of risk assessments in pretrial supervision decision-making and associated outcomes. Crime & Delinquency, 67(11), 1765–1791. https://doi.org/10.1177/00111287211022642

39.

Lowder

E. M.

Lawson

S. G.

Grommon

Ray

B. R.

(2020). Five—county validation of the Indiana Risk Assessment System—Pretrial Assessment Tool (IRAS-PAT) using a local validation approach. Justice Quarterly, 37(7), 1241–1260. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2020.1829006

40.

Lowenkamp

C. T.

VanNostrand

Holsinger

A. M.

(2013). The hidden costs of pretrial detention. Laura and John Arnold Foundation. https://craftmediabucket.s3.amazonaws.com/uploads/PDFs/LJAF_Report_hidden-costs_FNL.pdf

41.

Lowenkamp

C. T.

Whetzel

(2009). The development of an actuarial risk assessment instrument for U.S. pretrial services. Federal Probation, 73(2), 33–36. https://www.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/73_2_3_0.pdf

42.

Minow

Zittrain

Bowers

(2019). Technical flaws of pretrial risk assessments raise grave concerns. Berkman Klein Center. https://cyber.harvard.edu/story/2019-07/technical-flaws-pretrial-risk-assessments-raise-grave-concerns

43.

Monahan

Skeem

J. L.

(2016). Risk assessment in criminal sentencing. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 12, 489–513. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-021815-092945

44.

National Conference of State Legislatures. (2020). Pretrial release: State reports and other resources. https://www.ncsl.org/research/civil-and-criminal-justice/pretrial-policy-state-laws-reports-and-resources.aspx

45.

Oleson

J. C.

Lowenkamp

C. T.

Cadigan

T. P.

VanNostrand

Wooldredge

(2016). The effect of pretrial detention on sentencing in two federal districts. Justice Quarterly, 33(6), 1103–1122. https://doi.org/10.1080/07418825.2014.959035

46.

Pilnik

(2017). A framework for pretrial justice: Essential elements of an effective pretrial system and agency (p. 67). National Institute of Corrections. https://nicic.gov/resources/nic-library/all-library-items/framework-pretrial-justice-essential-elements-effective

47.

Pretrial Justice Institute. (2019). Scan of pretrial practices (No. 2019-10-02KN). https://university.pretrial.org/viewdocument/scan-of-pretrial-practices-pji-20

48.

Pretrial Justice Institute. (2020). Updated position on pretrial risk assessment tools. https://www.pretrial.org/wp-content/uploads/Risk-Statement-PJI-2020.pdf

49.

Pretrial Justice Institute. (2021). What if: 10 questions for sparking local pretrial change. Pretrial Justice Institute. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/6018b6a3956c02769138dd6f/t/618e84ba0d01f25f634f93e7/1636730043994/What+IF_11.11.21.pdf

50.

Sacks

Sainato

V. A.

Ackerman

A. R.

(2015). Sentenced to pretrial detention: A study of bail decisions and outcomes. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 40(3), 661–681. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-014-9268-0

51.

Sloan

C. W.

Naufal

Caspers

(2018). The effect of risk assessment scores on judicial behavior and defendant outcomes (SSRN ID 3301699). Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3301699

52.

Solow-Niederman

Choi

Van den Broeck

(2019). The institutional life of algorithmic risk assessment. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 34(3), 705–744. http://starai.cs.ucla.edu/papers/Solow-NiedermanBTLR19.pdf

53.

Stevenson

(2018). Assessing risk assessment in action. Minnesota Law Review, 103(1), 303–384. https://www.minnesotalawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/13Stevenson_MLR.pdf

54.

Stevenson

M. T.

Mayson

S. G.

(2017). Pretrial detention and bail. In Luna

(Ed.), Reforming criminal justice: A report by the academy for justice (pp. 21–47). Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law, Arizona State University. https://law.asu.edu/sites/default/files/pdf/academy_for_justice/2_Reforming-Criminal-Justice_Vol_3_Pretrial-Detention-and-Bail.pdf

55.

Terranova

V. A.

Ward

Slepicka

Azari

A. M.

(2020). Perceptions of pretrial risk assessment: An examination across role in the initial pretrial release decision. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(8), 927–942. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820932204

56.

van Eijk

. (2020). Inclusion and exclusion through risk-based justice: Analysing combinations of risk assessment from pretrial detention to release. The British Journal of Criminology, 60(4), 1080–1097. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azaa012

57.

Viljoen

J. L.

Cochrane

D. M.

Jonnson

M. R.

(2018). Do risk assessment tools help manage and reduce risk of violence and reoffending? A systematic review. Law and Human Behavior, 42(3), 181–214. https://doi.org/10.1037/lhb0000280

58.

Viljoen

J. L.

Jonnson

M. R.

Cochrane

D. M.

Vincent

G. M.

(2019). Impact of risk assessment instruments on rates of pretrial detention, postconviction placements, and release: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Law and Human Behavior, 43(5), 397–420.

59.

Viljoen

J. L.

Vargen

L. M.

Cochrane

D. M.

Jonnson

M. R.

Goossens

Monjazeb

(2021). Do structured risk assessments predict violent, any, and sexual offending better than unstructured judgment? An umbrella review. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 27(1), 79–97. https://doi.org/10.1037/law0000299

60.

Vincent

G. M.

Viljoen

J. L.

(2020). Racist algorithms or systemic problems? Risk assessments and racial disparities. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 47(12), 1576–1584. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093854820954501

61.

World Prison Brief. (2018). Highest to lowest—Prison population rate. https://www.prisonstudies.org/highest-to-lowest/prison_population_rate?field_region_taxonomy_tid=All

62.

Zeng

Minton

T. D.

(2021). Jail inmates in 2019 (NCJ 255608). Bureau of Justice Statistics. https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/jail-inmates-2019

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

1.33 MB

Pretrial Decision-Making Matrices: The Role of Risk and Charge Weighting in Risk Assessment–Guided Decisions

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material