Courts

The court system plays a critical role in the judicial process, impacting which arrestees are charged with and potentially convicted of a criminal offense. The court system consists broadly of prosecution, pretrial services and detention, defense services, and courts of limited and general jurisdiction, and oversees the adjudication process for juvenile and adult offenders.

BJS collects data on the offices and systems critical to the adjudication process, including indigent defense services, prosecutor offices, and state attorney general offices. Data from these offices provide estimates of staffing, caseloads, and expenditures associated with prosecuting and defending cases in the nation's courts. Several specialized collections focus on specific issues affecting the courts, such as cybercrime and how cases involving juveniles are processed in state court systems.

BJS also examines the adjudication of civil cases by bench or jury trial in a national sample of trial courts. These data provide information on the characteristics of plaintiffs and defendants as well as case processing and outcome characteristics, including post-verdict relief and appeals.

Recent Publications

• Federal Justice Statistics, 2019
• Justice Expenditures and Employment in the United States, 2017
• Federal Justice Statistics, 2015-2016

Recent Data Collections

• Census of Problem-Solving Courts (CPSC)
• Court Statistics Project (CSP)

What are the authorized purposes for use of grant funds under the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) Improvement Act?

FOR STATE AND TRIBAL GOVERNMENTS: Section 103 of the Act, regarding implementation assistance to the states, says that the grants "shall be used by the States and Indian tribal governments, in conjunction with units of local government and State and local courts, to establish or upgrade information and identification technologies for firearms eligibility determinations."

The law says that grants to states or American Indian tribes may only be used to—

• create electronic systems, which provide accurate and up-to-date information that is directly related to checks under the NICS, including court disposition and corrections records
• assist states in establishing or enhancing their own capacities to perform NICS background checks
• supply accurate and timely information to the Attorney General concerning final dispositions of criminal records to databases accessed by NICS
• supply accurate and timely information to the Attorney General concerning the identity of persons who have a federally prohibiting mental health adjudication or commitment
• supply accurate and timely court orders and records of misdemeanor crimes of domestic violence for inclusion in federal and state law enforcement databases used to conduct NICS background checks
• collect and analyze data needed to demonstrate levels of state compliance with the Act
• maintain the relief from disabilities program in accordance with Section 105, but not less than 3% and no more than 10% of each grant shall be used for this purpose.

FOR STATE COURT SYSTEMS: Section 301 of the Act, regarding grants to state court systems for the improvement of automation and transmittal of disposition records, says that grants be made to each state, consistent with state plans for the integration, automation, and accessibility of criminal history records, for use by the state court system to improve automation and transmittal to federal and state repositories of—

• criminal history dispositions
• records relevant to determining whether a person has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence or a prohibiting domestic violence protection order
• prohibiting mental adjudications and commitments.

The law says that the amounts granted will be used by the state court system only to—

"carry out, as necessary, assessments of the capabilities of state courts to automate and transmit arrest and conviction records, court orders, and mental health adjudications or commitments to federal and state record repositories; and
implement policies, systems, and procedures to automate and transmit arrest and" conviction records, court orders, and mental health adjudications or commitments to federal and state record repositories.

How many persons in the U.S. have ever been convicted of a felony?

This is a question the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) frequently receives and, unfortunately, cannot completely answer. BJS can provide an estimate of the number of living persons in the United States who have ever been to state or federal prison. At yearend 2001, more than 5.6 million U.S. adult residents, or about 1 in 37 U.S. adults, had served time in state or federal prison. See Prevalence of Imprisonment in the U.S. Population, 1974-2001.

BJS publishes reports in the Felony Sentences in State Courts series every two years, providing the number of persons convicted of a felony in state courts in a particular year.

How many persons were convicted of a felony in my state last year?

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) does not have conviction and sentencing information by state. Court statistics for individual states may be available by going to the state court website for a particular state. See the National Center for State Courts site for links to state court websites.

BJS does collect national-level statistics on race for criminal sentencing in state and federal courts:

A. State court sentencing statistics:

• BJS compiles and publishes national statistics every two years on adults convicted of felonies in state courts. The statistics include information on the race or Hispanic origin, sex, and age of the person convicted. Demographic statistics of convicted felons can be found in two BJS publications series–Felony Sentences in State Courts and State Court Sentencing of Convicted Felons.
• Statistical table 2.1 of Felony Sentences in State Courts, 2004, indicates that, of the nearly 1,079,000 adults convicted of a felony in 2004 in state courts nationwide, 59% were white, 38% were black, and 38% were persons identified as American Indians or Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander.
• State Court Sentencing of Convicted Felons, 2004–Statistical Tables, provides more demographic statistics on felony sentence types and sentence lengths. Table 2.7 provides the average sentence lengths received among persons convicted of a felony in 2004, broken out by the race of the felon.
• Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties, 2009–Statistical Tables, provides criminal sentencing data in the nation's 75 largest counties. Individuals arrested and charged with a felony in state courts are sampled from 40 of the nation's 75 largest counties. Within those counties in 2009, 45% of felony defendants were non-Hispanic blacks, 30% were non-Hispanic whites, 24% were Hispanics or Latinos of any race, and 2% were non-Hispanic persons of some other race.

B. Federal Justice Statistics series presents national level statistics describing all aspects of case processing in the federal criminal justice system, including adjudication in the U.S. district courts, sentencing, appeal of convictions and/or sentences imposed.