“Runaway
Losses: Estimating the Costs of Failure to Appear in the Los Angeles
Criminal Justice System”, published
by the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC)’s
Criminal Justice Task Force, May, 1997
Executive
Summary:
In
this study ALEC reports significant finding from a study of the costs of
failure to appear in the criminal courts in Los Angeles.
In
an earlier study (Evidence of a Failed System, April 1995, American
Legislative Exchange Council) ALEC reported the results of research into
the effectiveness of two systems in California to prevent “failure to
appear” (FTAs’). Evidence
of a Failed System showed that more than 60 percent of defendants are
released prior to trial by the courts of the nation’s 75 most populous
urban areas. In the three
counties studied (San Diego, San Francisco, and Los Angeles) the number
was little more than 40 percent. Of
those released in the three counties, slightly more than 50 percent were
released under some form of government-funded release without the
requirement to post financial security for a promise to appear.
Roughly 40 percent were released with some form of financial
security required.
Generally
those released OR were less likely to be violent and repeat offenders.
Despite the fact that the “bond” releases tended to be more
dangerous and more chronic criminals, the ALEC study found that a
defendant released OR without financial security was twice as likely to
appear for trial.
Every
failure to appear imposes quite substantial public costs associated with
the loss of respect for the justice system itself.
In this regard, it is estimated in this study that every fugitive
cost are included, the weighted average cost for each failure to appear
is $1,273.81.
These
costs are borne in addition to the more intangible costs associated with
the loss of respect for the justice system itself.
In this regard, it is estimated in this study that every fugitive
imposes over $25,000 in social costs on the citizens of Los Angeles
County.
Los Angeles County taxpayers bear a significantly higher burden for OR releases than for bond releasees for failure to appear. The expected cost for OR releases is $375.63 which 21/2 times the cost ($139.19) for bond releases. In terms of the expected social costs of fugitives, OR released defendants imposed $2,528 per releasee while bond released defendants imposed less than a third of that amount ($758). The lower failure to appear cost themselves suggest more emphasis should be put on private market-based bond release systems than the court-based OR system.
This change in policy toward a presumption for the use of a bond in every case could be accomplished by ether a change in court's own rules, or by legislation. It would inject into the present system, now heavily dependent on tax supported pretrial services programs, an element of rationality than springs from real-world market incentives.
Not
only does the private market perform better the main task of assuring
the appearance of criminal defendants, thereby reducing the social cost
of crime in Los Angeles, but now we see it does it at substantially less
costs to the taxpayers. The results should suggest a clear public
policy agenda.
For A Complete Copy of this Publication Contact:
|
The American Legislative Exchange Council, Publications Department
|
