Liberated Prosecution? A Comparison of Outcomes in Circuit and District Courts

• In Event: Policy Evaluation Surrounding Courts and Sentencing

Abstract

A key thrust of progressive prosecutorial reforms is an effort to address racial inequality and reduce incarceration without sacrificing public safety. To date, reform efforts have largely targeted non-violent and non-serious offenses. Yet, skeptics argue that such reforms have limited utility because the offenses involved are not generally large drivers of incarceration. According to these scholars, disparity is concentrated in more serious offenses. At the same time, scholars have long suggested that there is the greatest opportunity for discretion for the least serious crimes – i.e., the liberation hypothesis. This would suggest that disparity might be more likely or more substantial for low-level offenses. This research explores these issues using prosecution data for cases filed in Circuit and District court in a single Maryland jurisdiction. Specifically, to what extent is there disparity in upper- and lower- court prosecutorial outcomes? Does defendant race differentially impact outcomes depending on venue?

Authors

• Miranda Galvin, Towson University

• Brian D. Johnson, University of Maryland, College Park

• Kevin Peterson, University of North Carolina at Charlotte

• Allison Redlich, George Mason University