Pretrial Research Highlights in 2023

Research continues to confirm that pretrial assessments, when rigorously developed and properly validated, are accurate at predicting court appearance and the likelihood of not getting a new arrest, and do not, on their own, create or exacerbate existing system biases.

Validation and Predictive Bias Testing of the Public Safety Assessment (PSA)
RTI International, January 2023

• Fulton County, GA, DeMichele, Tueller, Inkpen, Dawes & Lattimore, January 2023
• Pierce County, WA, DeMichele, Teuller, Burtch, Dawes & Lattimore, January 2023
• Thurston County, WA, DeMichele, Tueller, Janda, Dawes & Lattimore, January 2023

RTI’s findings are consistent with previous research: the PSA provides reliable predictive results, and there is a lack of evidence of predictive bias by race or gender.

Pretrial Risk Assessment on the Ground: Algorithms, Judgments, Meaning, and Policy
Moore, Ferguson & Geurin, August 2023

This study examined 15,134 felony cases from Albuquerque, New Mexico, over a three-year period and found the PSA to be predictive of pretrial outcomes and free of signs of racial bias. Researchers looked at the variation in success rates across jurisdictions and underscored the importance of increasing judicial and other stakeholders’ understanding of what various assessment scores mean. They also encouraged further research on the topic. The study also found that only a small percentage of crime—particularly violent crime—is committed by people on pretrial release. In addition, the researchers show that proposed legislation that would apply charge-based “rebuttable presumptions” of detention could end up unnecessarily detaining many people while only preventing a small fraction of crime.

Pretrial Assessment Research Review: Bias and Disparities
NAPSA, December 2023

The National Association of Pretrial Services Agencies (NAPSA) created this list of pretrial assessment studies, the majority of which did not find bias or disparities in the tools evaluated. NAPSA notes that, in the studies where concerns were raised, “…they were not severe enough that the researchers concluded the tool should not be used. Rather, they recommended adjustments and revalidation projects.”

Research continues to demonstrate that pretrial detention creates a long list of harms for people who are detained and illustrates why it should be “carefully limited” to only those people who are eligible under state law and, following a due process hearing, are shown to pose clear risks that cannot otherwise be addressed.

The Benefits of Early Release from Pretrial Detention
RTI International, February 2023

Researchers compared people detained for less than 1 day, more than 1 day, more than 3 days, and more than 7 days. The data, drawn from three U.S. counties, showed that people detained for fewer days have better legal outcomes (e.g., court appearance and no new arrest) than those detained for more days pretrial.

The Pretrial Detention Penalty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Pretrial Detention and Case Outcomes
St. Louis, March 2023

This study found that people who are detained face more severe case outcomes, with the strongest effect being an increase in their likelihood of incarceration. Performing a meta-analysis on 57 previously conducted studies, researchers found that detention had a medium effect on convictions, guilty pleas, and dismissals; a smaller effect on sentence length; and a nonsignificant, small effect on charge reductions.

The Effect of Pre-Arraignment Legal Representation on Criminal Case Outcomes
Lacoe, Fischer & Raphael, May 2023

The researchers, who used data from Santa Clara County, California, suggest that timely access to legal representation could improve release and case outcomes for public defender clients. The study found that for people with low incomes, access to legal counsel immediately after arrest resulted in 28 percent more pretrial releases and 36 percent more case dismissals than for similar people who met a public defender at their arraignment hearing.

Probable Cause Reform as Bail Reform
Calaway, November 2023

This study analyzed initial appearance hearings in Hamilton County, Ohio. Researchers found that criminal case arrests end in dismissal over 50 percent of the time and that the majority of those whose cases are dismissed are unable to post money bond and are detained until the time of the case dismissal.

Research continues to show that the traditional reactive and punitive approaches to missed court appearances are ineffective. Also, new research shows that nondefendant actors fail to appear for court hearings far more often than people accused of crime. Relatedly, the University of North Carolina Criminal Justice Innovation Lab released a Court Appearance Toolbox to help system stakeholders explore more effective solutions to missed court appearances.

National Guide to Improving Court Appearances
ideas42, May 2023

This report describes descriptions and examples of ways jurisdictions can improve court appearances beyond the traditional reactive and punitive approaches.

Systemic Failure to Appear in Court
Graef, Mayson, Ouss & Stevenson, August 2023

Using ten years of data from Philadelphia, this study found that nondefendants (lawyers, police, witnesses) fail to appear for court hearings at rates higher than people charged. During a ten-year period, nondefendants failed to appear for at least one hearing in 53 percent of all cases, compared to a 19 percent rate for people charged with a crime.

Overall, research continues to indicate that overly intrusive and onerous methods of pretrial supervision are not very effective and create many negative outcomes.

Assessing the Effectiveness of Varying Intensities of Pretrial Supervision: Full Findings from the Pretrial Justice Collaborative
MDRC, June 2023

This study explores the impact of different levels of pretrial supervision on court appearance and arrest outcomes. A key takeaway is that lower-intensity supervision was as effective as higher-intensity supervision in helping people attend court and remain law-abiding.

Assessing the Effectiveness of Pretrial Special Conditions: Full Findings from the Pretrial Justice Collaborative
MDRC, June 2023

Using data from four U.S. jurisdictions, this study found that being released on electronic monitoring or sobriety monitoring did not significantly improve court appearance rates during the pretrial period. In addition, neither type of monitoring significantly improved the percentage of people who avoided a new arrest, but there was variation in this effect among jurisdictions.

Pretrial Pilot Program: Final Report to the Legislature
Judicial Council of California, July 2023

This study looked at pretrial services pilot projects implemented in 16 California courts. The projects aimed to increase the safe release of people pretrial, use the least restrictive monitoring practices while protecting community safety and ensuring court appearance, validate and expand the use of pretrial assessment tools, and identify any bias. Despite the COVID-19 pandemic, the pilot projects continued, with a total of 422,151 individuals assessed. Data suggests an overall net positive impact of the program, including an increase in pretrial release, a decrease in new arrests, and an increase in court appearances for misdemeanors. There was a slight increase (2.5 percent) in missed court appearances for felonies.

The Imposition of Pretrial Conditions on Released Federal Defendants: The Overuse of Conditions Without Providing any Measurable Benefits
Cohen & Hicks, December 2023

This study examined the imposition of pretrial conditions on 223,260 people. The results show that people released from custody while awaiting case resolution received an average of nine conditions and that the association between conditions and a person’s pretrial risk classification was relatively modest. The results also show conditions having no significant relationship with reductions in the likelihood of pretrial crime or missed court appearances; however, the probability of being revoked for technical violations increased with the number of conditions imposed.

Is Bail Reform Causing an Increase in Crime?
Stemen & Olson, January 2023

Researchers analyzed pretrial improvements in Cook County (Chicago), Illinois; Harris County (Houston), Texas; Philadelphia; and New Jersey. They found that reducing pretrial detention and eliminating financial conditions of release had a minimal negative effect on community safety. After taking into account the adverse effects of pretrial detention, the authors write, “…these reforms may, on balance, improve the well-being of communities most impacted by crime.”

The Impact of COVID-19 on Crime, Arrests, and Jail Populations: Expanding Analysis to 21 Months Post Pandemic and Beyond
JFA Institute, March 2023

Researchers analyzed jail populations and arrests associated with pandemic-related policies. They found in 11 jurisdictions that emergency measures to release large numbers of people who were awaiting trial in jail did not result in increased arrests.

Does New York’s Bail Reform Law Impact Recidivism? A Quasi-Experimental Test in New York City
Ropac & Rempel, March 2023

This report analyzed the impact of New York’s pretrial release reforms on recidivism in New York City. The study found that eliminating financial release conditions for most misdemeanor and nonviolent felony charges reduced recidivism (i.e., new arrests) to 44 percent from 50 percent, and reduced new felony rearrest rates to 24 percent from 27 percent. For people charged with violent felonies, in which a financial release condition legally could be set, reducing the use of money bonds through supervised release or requiring judges to set the least restrictive conditions did not affect recidivism in either direction.

Releasing People Pretrial Doesn’t Harm Public Safety
Prison Policy Initiative, July 2023

Researchers conducted a data overview in four states and nine local jurisdictions that implemented changes to reduce the reliance on financial conditions of pretrial release. It found that releasing more people pretrial did not negatively impact community safety.