Examining Case Dismissal Outcomes in Prosecutor-Led Diversion Programs

• Author: Matthew W. Epperson,Leon Sawh,Sadiq Patel,Carrie Pettus,Annie Grier
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/08874034221138738
• Published date: 01 April 2023
• Date: 01 April 2023
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/08874034221138738

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2023, Vol. 34(3) 236 –260

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/08874034221138738

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjp

Article

Examining Case Dismissal

Outcomes in Prosecutor-Led

Diversion Programs

Matthew W. Epperson1, Leon Sawh2,

Sadiq Patel3, Carrie Pettus4,

and Annie Grier4

Abstract

Prosecutors’ offices are a critical site for criminal legal reform and decarceration

efforts. Prosecutor-led diversion programs (PLDPs) are a prosecutorial innovation that

process cases away from punitive prosecution and, instead, offer various services and

supports. Successfully completing a PLDP results in the dismissal of the charge, which

helps participants to avoid formal entry into the criminal legal system and a range of

collateral consequences. This paper reports findings from over 11,000 participants in

six PLDPs in three Midwestern jurisdictions, and examines race/ethnicity and charge

characteristics associated with successful program completion and case dismissal.

Findings indicate that PLDPs have the capacity to provide alternative processing to

a large volume of defendants with high completion rates, although the likelihood of

racial/ethnic minorities to successfully complete the program is mixed. PLDPs are

discussed as a promising policy and programmatic innovation that can help to move

away from an era of mass incarceration.

Keywords

prosecutors, diversion, decarceration, prosecutor-led diversion programs

1The University of Chicago, IL, USA

2Abt Associates, Chicago, IL, USA

3Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA

4Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA

Corresponding Author:

Matthew W. Epperson, Crown Family School of Social Work, Policy, and Practice, The University of

Chicago, 969 E. 60th Street, Chicago, IL 60637, USA.

Email: mepperson@uchicago.edu

1138738CJPXXX10.1177/08874034221138738Criminal Justice Policy ReviewEpperson et al.

research-article2022

Epperson et al. 237

Introduction

The United States incarcerates a greater number and proportion of its population than

any other country in the world (Wagner & Sawyer, 2018). At year-end 2020, over 5.5

million people were supervised by the U.S. adult criminal legal system and of those,

approximately 1.7 million were incarcerated (Kluckow & Zeng, 2022). Previous esti-

mates indicate that people charged with nonviolent offenses make up over 60% of the

prison and jail population, while drug charges account for approximately 25% of all

incarcerated persons (Schmitt et al., 2010). Meanwhile, the system of mass incarcera-

tion costs local, state, and federal governments and the families of incarcerated people

over $180 billion annually (Wagner & Rabuy, 2017).

An overly punitive approach to prosecution is increasingly recognized as a driving

force in mass incarceration. In recent years, the notion of “progressive prosecutors”

has gained traction, in recognition that prosecutors have significant power to repair

much of the damage that has been perpetuated on people involved in the criminal legal

system. At the same time, prosecutors are tasked with responding to a variety of urgent

issues that impact public safety, most notably gun violence and other forms of vio-

lence. However, jurisdictions throughout the country grapple with an overwhelming

number of low-priority or nonviolent misdemeanor and felony cases that overburden

local court systems (Labriola et al., 2018; Rempel et al., 2018). As a result, some pros-

ecutors have embraced a re-envisioning of their role within the criminal legal system

and are rethinking the meaning of a successful prosecutorial outcome.

Coupled with the growing national interest to reduce the overuse of mass incarcera-

tion and also minimize the impact of the collateral consequences associated with a

criminal conviction, a growing number of prosecutors are turning to pretrial diversion

programming to divert select types of cases away from the court system. While the

traditional role of a prosecutor is to prosecute those charged with engaging in criminal-

ized behaviors, some jurisdictions have implemented prosecutor-led diversion pro-

grams (PLDPs) in recent years. PLDPs are defined as a type of front-end diversion

program specially designed to redirect eligible defendants away from traditional court

proceedings and into community-based programming. Upon completion of PLDP

requirements, a defendant’s case is dismissed, thus terminating the criminal legal pro-

cess for that particular case and avoiding future collateral consequences (Orwat et al.,

2019; Rempel et al., 2018). However, little is known about these emerging PLDPs,

especially their potential to substantially and safely reduce the numbers of individuals

cycling through the criminal legal system via jails and prisons.

This study entails an examination of six PLDPs across three large Midwestern U.S.

prosecutors’ offices. The first purpose of the study is to examine the volume, demo-

graphic, and charge characteristics of PLDP participants—in other words, who is gain-

ing access to these programs and what is their programmatic capacity? Next, we

examine the critically important client outcome of case dismissal and assess to what

extent PLDP completion and case dismissal is predicted by participant demographics

and charge characteristics. We discuss the implications of these findings in the context