Case Resolution
This section presents data on all cases prosecuted by the District Attorney's (DA) Office that have reached a final resolution (a case disposition). Cases can be resolved in a variety of ways, including by dismissal, diversion, deferred judgment, guilty plea, or by acquittal or guilty verdict at trial. Successful diversion completions will be categorized as dismissals, for more information on diversion please see the Diversion and Deferrals section.
Why is this important? It is important to review how cases are resolved to ensure we are addressing serious crime effectively while minimizing unnecessary punitiveness.
Since the start of the pandemic, we have struggled to resolve cases at the same rate they are filed. It's important for us to be resolving roughly the same number of cases as are filed every year to ensure we are not building a backlog in the justice system. Throughout the pandemic, necessary limitations on jury trials, in-person proceedings, and court closures have all contributed to a slower rate of case resolution. We would like to see the case resolutions increase to achieve parity with case filing numbers so that the justice system is not overwhelmed with additional cases beyond its current capacity.
Indicators
Below are a set of indicators that provide additional context about case resolutions. These indicators help the DA's Office ensure they are achieving outcomes efficiently, effectively, and fairly.
Our office charges a particular case based on what the evidence will prove and how the Colorado Legislature has defined those offenses. However, we often engage in appropriate negotiation and consider any additional facts about the case or mitigation about a defendant that is provided. For defendants who want to accept responsibility and proactively engage in rehabilitation, that often results in a reduction in the charge. We will continue to monitor our charging decisions and plea agreement practices, but will encourage our prosecutors to use their discretion to reduce charges where appropriate.
Reminder: Race and Ethnicity data is NOT based on a consistent method of voluntary self-identification. While we work on strategies to improve that data collection, we believe it's important to engage in discussions around issues such as the one highlighted in this metric. Our office is committed to a deeper study of these issues to better understand the root causes of disparity in the criminal justice system. You can read more about these issues in our detailed report.
Click Here for more information about race and ethnicity data collection and limitations.
Reminder: Race and Ethnicity data is NOT based on a consistent method of voluntary self-identification. While we work on strategies to improve that data collection, we believe it's important to engage in discussions around issues such as the one highlighted in this metric. We have also taken additional steps to ensure that Hispanic defendants are not underrepresented due to historical data collection practices. Our office is committed to a deeper study of these issues to better understand the root causes of disparity in the criminal justice system. You can read more about these issues in our detailed report.
Click Here for more information about race and ethnicity data collection and limitations.
There are a myriad of reasons that impact the length of time for case resolution. Some of those are the result of choices or actions made by a prosecutor, but many of those reasons are outside of our office's control. This can include delays in a defendant hiring an attorney or applying for court-appointed counsel. Delays can be caused by continuances granted by the court, or a defendant missing a court date. However, there can be no doubt that our office has at least some influence over this metric and we must do better.
We are encouraged that we've seen some reduction in the median time for resolution throughout 2022 as restrictions on courthouse operations have come to a close. We will continue to train our prosecutors and seek to staff our office appropriately to manage these cases to earlier average resolutions so that victims and defendants are not left waiting for justice. We will also work to target the extremely lengthy cases that are driving the average time to resolution higher.
During COVID-19 there was uncertainty about whether or how cases were going to proceed, lengthening our court processes. In addition, cases which are referred to a diversion program often lengthen the average time to dismissal as defendants must complete treatment programming successfully before a case is dismissed. We will continue to monitor this indicator and work to better identify cases dismissed due to diversion or other causes.
While we are encouraged that this metric shows progress and reflects that the median is comparable to pre-pandemic levels, the average continues to remain high. We will work on identifying these outlying cases to bring the average back into alignment with our office's expectations.
In general, we would like to decrease the number of hearings to avoid prolonged case processing. Overall, hearings in 2022 were lower than the rate we saw the prior year, though we will closely monitor the slight uptick reflected in fourth-quarter data. We want to ensure that hearings are meaningful and accomplish something to move the case forward to ensure victims and defendants see their cases moving forward.
Notes
- Underlying data counts for each chart can be accessed through this link.
- Each case is reflected by its top disposition. For example, if a charge on a case is dismissed as a part of plea negotiations and another charge on the case is plead guilty, the case will be reflected here as a “plead guilty.”
- The charge level represents the most serious charge filed in a case.
- Warrants are excluded (for all cases identified as a warrant).
- Cases disposed with a disposition reason “deceased defendant” are excluded from case resolution related charts.
- Hearings that occurred after case resolution (for e.g., if a defendant was on probation or returned to court for some reason after the case was disposed) are excluded from the average number of hearings per case.