Many RATs also include the severity of the charge someone is arrested for as a factor to predict risk. Our research found current charges as a factor in 33 of the 53 distinct risk assessment tools in our database.
Charges can be heavily weighted against an accused person, especially if someone is charged with an offense that is classified as “violent.” It is important to note that RATs assume charges for violent offenses, especially allegations of injury, are true in their calculation of risk. This assumption flies in the face of a person’s presumption of innocence before a trial.
Charges are also often used in conjunction with risk score in a decision-making framework to recommend specific pretrial outcomes, meaning in some cases the charge may be counted against someone twice.
However, it is important to note that the charges are simply an accusation. The accused person generally does not have a chance to dispute the charges before such charges are factored into a RAT, and they can ratchet up a risk score against someone who is legally innocent.
Charges also reflect the choice of a prosecutor in pursuing a case.
Prosecutors have a lot of power in determining the path of an accused person through the criminal legal system. They get to determine what charges to bring against an accused person or whether or not charges are filed at all.
Prosecutors can decide to only press minor misdemeanor charges or more serious felony charges for the same behavior, and even to “stack” charges1 by charging someone for many different crimes within the same arrest, far above the number or type of charges a prosecutor expects to actually result in a conviction. The power to determine charge severity is especially important if prosecutorial discretion is the difference between a charge that includes violence or allegations of injury and a non-violent charge.
A study in San Francisco found that under the PSA, overbooking on charges that did not result in an actual conviction increased the PSA’s recommended pretrial supervision level in 27% of cases.2 This means that the practice of stacking unsubstantiated charges is leading to increased levels of wholly unnecessary pretrial supervision.
Studies show that the race of the accused person can matter in these decisions about the severity of charges.3
Black men especially “receive disproportionately harsher treatment at each stage of the prosecutorial decision-making process.”4
One study found that how the prosecutor chooses to press charges, especially for charges with a mandatory minimum sentence, varies by race and has a huge impact on ultimate sentencing and jail time. Black men are 1.75 times more likely than others to be faced with charges that carry a mandatory minimum.5
Another study found that in Wisconsin, white individuals were 25% more likely to have their charges dropped or reduced than Black individuals.6
A San Francisco study found that Black individuals are less likely to have cases dropped or dismissed and more likely to have felony charges filed against them than other groups.7
Black youth are also disproportionately likely to be formally charged, referred to court, and charged as adults.8
