Dr. Natalie W Goulette

Scholars and practitioners continue to examine the growing pretrial detainee population. These individuals have not been convicted of a crime, and yet they sit in detention, taxing jail facilities and their limited budgets. Pretrial risk assessment tools have been created to identify individuals who can be released prior to trial, without jeopardizing community safety. The current study revalidates items included in the Florida Pretrial Risk Assessment Instrument. Results suggest that most individuals on pretrial release do not commit new offenses or fail to appear for future court hearings. Similarities and differences between the original study and the revalidation are noted. The inclusion of assessing "community ties" is also explored.

There are two groups of possible collateral (unintended) consequences for suspects who are not released from jail prior to trial: harsher treatment at subsequent decision points within the criminal justice system (sometimes referred to as “cumulative disadvantage”), and adverse effects on these individuals and their families outside the system. These collateral consequences may also be experienced disproportionately by individuals with the highest odds of pretrial detention, particularly minority and indigent suspects. Our chapter begins with an overview of the field’s current understanding of extra-legal disparities in pretrial dispositions and the evidence suggesting that harsher treatment at pretrial influences case outcomes. We then discuss the adverse social, economic, and psychological effects of pretrial detention on the accused and his or her family. Finally, we offer some considerations for research on the topic.

Empirical research on extra-legal disparities in criminal case outcomes has recently incorporated a greater focus on the role of prosecutors (relative to judges) in shaping these disparities. To encourage greater focus on defense attorneys in related empirical research, this chapter addresses three questions regarding the role of defense attorneys in shaping extra-legal disparities in case processing and outcomes. First, why is empirical research on defense attorneys less popular relative to research on prosecutors. Second, what observations can be identified in the courts literature that suggest defense attorneys might have a greater role in disparate outcomes than a focus on prosecutors would convey. Finally, how might the observations identified for question 2 inform a framework for understanding defense attorneys' influences on these decisions. Towards the end of advancing related frameworks and as encouragement for further research, the chapter offers an exploratory bi-level analysis of guilty pleas and charge reductions in a large urban court, with defendants nested within defense attorneys.