skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 251664 Find in a Library
Title: Prosecutor-Led Pretrial Diversion: Case Studies in Eleven Jurisdictions
Author(s): Melissa Labriola; Warren A. Reich; Robert C. Davis; Priscillia Hunt; Michael Rempel; Samantha Cherney
Corporate Author: Fund for the City of New York
United States of America
Date Published: April 2018
Page Count: 93
Sponsoring Agency: Fund for the City of New York
New York, NY 10018
National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
Washington, DC 20531
US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
Washington, DC 20531
Grant Number: 2012-IJ-CX-0036
Sale Source: US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
810 Seventh Street, NW
Washington, DC 20531
United States of America
Document: PDF
Type: Case Study; Program/Project Description; Report (Grant Sponsored); Report (Study/Research); Research (Applied/Empirical)
Format: Document; Document (Online)
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This study’s purpose was to provide a national portrait of prosecutor-led diversion programs, using case studies of the goals, history, policies, and practices of diversion programs conducted by 11 prosecutors’ offices selected to provide variations in program timing (pre- or post-filing),target population, program intensity and duration, and other policies and practices.
Abstract: Prosecutor-led diversion typically involves providing treatment or services in lieu of formal prosecution for low-level offenses. The diversion programs examined had significant diversity in their target populations and policies; however, a number of noteworthy strengths were evident across jurisdictions. These were as follows: 1) inclusive planning processes that involved both public defenders and the court; 2) a willingness to offer diversion to defendants with a prior record and those charged with selected felonies; 3) the use of pre-filing programs in some sites that route defendants from the court process before it even begins; 4) consistent dismissals for diversion completion, which limits collateral consequences for defendants); and 5) generally positive perceptions of the program among staff, stakeholders, and program participants. Some notable challenges identified were the use of fines and fees in some programs as a precondition for completion; significant use of “one size fits all” program mandates in many sites; and a lack of evidence-based treatment in most sites. One noted study limitation was a focus on 16 high-volume programs located in large jurisdictions with a staff interested in an intensive study of the program. The study design included intensive case studies of 15 diversion programs, focus groups with diversion participants in select sites, and an examination of lessons learned from one site experiencing a revamping of diversion programs. 7 tables, 22 references, and appended interview protocol, focus group guide, and program logic models
Main Term(s): Prosecutorial diversion
Index Term(s): Case studies; National Institute of Justice (NIJ); NIJ final report; Prosecutorial discretion; Prosecutorial screening; Prosecutors
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.