The Association Between Case Volume and Case Processing Times in New York City

• Author: Kevin T. Wolff,Olive Lu,Preeti Chauhan,Jonathan Leventhal
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1177/08874034221089868
• Published date: 01 October 2022
• Date: 01 October 2022
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/08874034221089868

Criminal Justice Policy Review

2022, Vol. 33(8) 814 –842

© The Author(s) 2022

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/08874034221089868

journals.sagepub.com/home/cjp

Article

The Association Between

Case Volume and Case

Processing Times in New

York City

Kevin T. Wolff1, Olive Lu2, Preeti Chauhan2,

and Jonathan Leventhal2

Abstract

Past research has highlighted a number of case- and court-level characteristics that

may be associated with differences in case processing time, yet other factors remain

relatively unexplored. Drawing on an extensive case-level data set of misdemeanor and

felony cases resolved in New York City’s court system, the current study contributes

to our knowledge of case processing time by examining the association between the

relative volume of arraignments (at the borough level) and case processing time. The

analysis employs standard regression techniques to assess the relationship between

case volume and case processing time while controlling for a number of individual- and

case-level characteristics. Results suggest the relative volume of cases coming into the

court system is positively associated with case processing time, net of several relevant

case-level characteristics. These findings contribute to the small and inconsistent

findings reported in prior work. Implications of these findings for future research and

criminal justice policy are discussed.

Keywords

case processing time, New York City Courts, case volume

Introduction

Case processing time refers to the time it takes to move a criminal case from arrest

through the various stages of decision-making to final case disposition, whether it be

1John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York, USA

2Data Collaborative for Justice at John Jay College, New York, NY, USA

Corresponding Author:

Kevin T. Wolff, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, 524 W. 59th Street, New York, NY 10019, USA.

Email: kwolff@jjay.cuny.edu

1089868CJPXXX10.1177/08874034221089868Criminal Justice Policy ReviewWol et al.

research-article2022

Wolff et al. 815

dismissal, a plea, or trial (Zatz & Lizotte, 1985). Over the years, a number of court

rulings have emphasized the importance of avoiding court delays, highlighting there

must be a balance between meeting the needs of those facing criminal charges, those

who have been victimized, and society as a whole. Individuals charged with criminal

offenses have a constitutional right to a speedy trial as guaranteed by the Sixth

Amendment that involves freedom from oppressive pretrial incarceration as well as

basic procedural safeguards that assure fairness in the criminal justice process (Garcia,

1992). It is important to note, however, that not all cases should be disposed of quickly

and without careful thought and attention. Clearly, more complicated, more difficult,

and more serious cases should receive more time than those that are less complex and

carry less severe consequences. The idea of proportionality is intended to not only

maintain equality and due process in the treatment of cases but also acknowledge the

reality that resources are limited and must be managed (Ostrom et al., 2018).

Importantly, the time required for a criminal case to be processed has both human

and financial costs. First, individuals who are detained during the pretrial period, who

make up approximately 65% of all individuals in U.S. jails (Zeng, 2019), represent a

significant financial burden to the system. Furthermore, the individual and human

costs of lengthy pretrial periods can be measured in terms of lost wages and employ-

ment separation, mortgage/rent default, time away from families, and the like (Center

for Prison Reform, 2015).1 In addition, if cases are unnecessarily delayed or even too

brief, the costs (both to the system and the individuals involved) can potentially under-

mine the legitimacy of the justice system (Voigt, 2016). Thus, while efficient case

processing represents only one goal of the criminal legal system, in many cases it is

related to very real human outcomes.

Case processing time is also arguably related to possible case outcomes, such as a

plea bargain versus jury trial, as individuals who have been held in custody for longer

periods of time may be more willing to enter a plea than those who have not spent time

in jail, whereas those hoping for a dismissal or understanding of inevitable guilt may

wish to delay processing as long as possible (Petersen, 2020; Sacks & Ackerman,

2012; Zatz & Lizotte, 1985). Given this, examining extra-legal factors associated with

processing time and efforts to reduce unnecessary delays become central to providing

equitable treatment (Jacob, 1983). These concerns have contributed to court-driven

interventions such as the “Excellence Initiative” put forward by New York’s Chief

Judge Janet DiFiore, whose goal was to improve case processing performance across

jurisdictions statewide.

The question remains, however, whether there are other upstream factors (such as

the volume of cases coming before the court) that may affect case processing time. The

purpose of the current work is to examine the impact of system inputs (the volume of

arrests/arraignments by month/year) on case processing time in New York City, after

controlling for case severity, crime type, and other individual- and borough-level fac-

tors. First, we review the limited prior work on case processing time, presenting argu-

ments as to why the volume of cases may affect processing time net of all case-level

characteristics considered. We go on to highlight how changes in criminal justice

policy and enforcement seen in recent years may contribute to the relative volume of