skip navigation

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar


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 Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database. 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: NCJ 187772   Add to Shopping cart   Find in a Library
  Title: Evaluation of Efforts to Implement No-Drop Policies: Two Central Values in Conflict, Final Report
  Document URL: PDF 
  Dataset URL: DATASET 1
  Author(s): Barbara E. Smith ; Robert Davis ; Laura B. Nickles ; Heather J. Davies
  Corporate Author: American Bar Assoc
Criminal Justice Section
United States of America
  Date Published: 03/2001
  Page Count: 91
  Annotation: Research conducted in Omaha, NE, Everett, WA, Klamath Falls, OR, and San Diego, CA, sought to determine if prosecution of perpetrators of domestic assault without the victim’s consent was feasible with appropriate increases in resources.
  Abstract: The study chose the three sites due to their receipt of funds from the Office of Justice Program for no-drop prosecution under the Violence against Women Office grant program to encourage arrest policies. These sites’ grant proposals seemed the clearest about implementing a strong no-drop policy. The research added San Diego to the sites because it was the first place to try no-drop and is regarded as successful. Study information came from interviews with criminal justice officials, onsite observations, a review of written policies, analysis of case samples, and victim interviews. Results revealed that no-drop is more a philosophy than a strict policy of prosecuting domestic violence cases. None of the prosecutors pursued every case they filed. Results also revealed that establishing a no-drop policy can increase convictions significantly. Findings also indicated that implementing no-drop requires significant case screening up front and that a successful no-drop policy requires judges who accept the idea of admitting hearsay or excited utterances from victims and statements from defendants, or documentation of prior bad acts. Findings also revealed that no-drop is expensive. Finally, the interview data suggested that victims may regard prosecution as beneficial, even if they did not want any action beyond arrest. Figures, tables, and 15 references
  Main Term(s): Court procedures
  Index Term(s): Prosecutorial discretion ; Prosecution ; Domestic assault ; Prosecutor-victim interaction ; Criminal Justice System Response to Victims ; Victim reactions to the Criminal Justice System ; Domestic assault arrest policies ; Nebraska ; Oregon ; Washington ; California
  Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America
  Grant Number: 98-WT-VX-0029
  Sale Source: NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America

American Bar Assoc
Criminal Justice Section
740 15th Street, NW
Washington, DC, 20005-1009
United States of America
  Type: Program/Project Evaluation
  Country: United States of America
  Language: English
  Note: Dataset may be archived by the NIJ Data Resources Program at the National Archive of Criminal Justice Data
  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.