443-984-6000 The Honorable Bill Ferguson President of the Senate State House, H-107 100 State Circle Annapolis, MD 21401 – 1991 CC: Speaker Adrienne A. Jones February 26, 2020 Dear Senate President Ferguson: Thank you for your letter dated February 17, 2020. I appreciate your patience as my office gathered the information you requested. Before I detail the data, please allow me to make a few observations based on our conversation last week. There have been a number of false misconceptions and intentional misrepresentations about my office’s conviction rate and our approach to violent crime. As you are aware, in September 2019, Governor Hogan sent a letter to Attorney General Frosh. The letter was the basis for the Governor’s push to grant Mr. Frosh twenty-five new prosecutor positions to prosecute crime exclusively in Baltimore City. The Governor wrote, "far too often in Baltimore City, violent offenders get a slap on the wrist and are released back out onto the streets to commit yet another violent offense.”1 He also accused my office of obtaining a nolle prosequi in too many cases and handing out lenient plea deals. As you will see from the data below, the Governor’s claims are demonstrably false, and the Governor’s case for providing Mr. Frosh with more prosecutors is built on a premise that would be laughed out of any Baltimore City courtroom. As for my office’s conviction rate, I have always said that my prosecutors must be guided by justice, not convictions, and that we do not see a conviction rate as a metric of success. Nonetheless, conservatives have distorted data to give a misleading picture of my conviction rate to the public. Recently, former Newt Gingrich staffer, Sean Kennedy, claimed in the Wall Street Journal that, “Between 2015 and 2018, fewer than 1 in 6 charged murderers in Baltimore earned a prison sentence. Ms. Mosby has lost or dropped 43% of her homicide cases.” 2 This assertion is also false. Our office’s conviction rate for the period Mr. Kennedy highlighted actually averages 82%. Our office nolle prossed and/or stetted an average of 9% of homicide cases and an average of 17% of cases resulted in a not guilty verdict for that period. Mr. Kennedy has also wrote in the Washington Post that “In 2018, more than a third of illegal gun cases were 1 2 https://htv-prod-media.s3.amazonaws.com/files/ltrtoag-1568848254.pdf https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-wire-is-finished-but-baltimore-still-bleeds-11581119104 ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 dismissed by Mosby’s office altogether….she loses, defers or pleas down the charges in another 50 percent, avoiding the mandatory minimum in state law. In only 18 percent of cases are gun crime defendants found guilty. And even those who are convicted see little to no jail time. Of the nearly 8,600 charges filed for “felon in possession of a firearm” offenses across Maryland in 2019, only 505 went to prison for gun offenses — fewer than one out of every 17 charged” 3 None of this is true. Per Mr. Kennedy’s citations, he appears to have misconstrued data from a Department of Legislative Services document, adding together circuit and district court firearm charges (which do not equate to cases), and looking at DOC intakes rather than realizing that this data doesn’t include local jail populations.4 Nevertheless, Mr. Kennedy’s misleading information has been circulated widely by Maryland Republicans, including Governor Hogan.5 I hope they will all be willing to correct the record. Mr. Kennedy and Governor Hogan seem to have trouble understanding what constitutes a conviction, and seem to conflate convictions with dropped cases, charges and/or counts. The Oxford English Dictionary defines a conviction as “A formal declaration that someone is guilty of a criminal offense, made by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law.”6 In calculating the conviction rate, my office follows the guidelines of the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys (APA). According to the APA, “A conviction is a legal declaration that someone is guilty of a criminal offense, made by the verdict of a jury or the decision of a judge in a court of law. Conviction rate, just like any other completion percentage, is calculated by dividing the number of convictions by the number of overall adjudicated cases.” 7 In other words, a conviction rate should only factor in the cases that prosecutors bring into court in an attempt to obtain a guilty finding. As you are aware, my prosecutors are not responsible for the number of arrests made or the charges that police file. As the APA notes, “[The]APA is not aware of any criminal justice system that measures prosecutorial performance and efficiency based upon the number of counts that result in conviction as a percentage of all counts included in the original charging instrument."8 In short, our office should be judged the same way as any other prosecuting office in the United States of America, which is why we collect and report our convictions according to the APA standards. 3 https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/02/20/make-baltimore-safe-charm-city-shouldpursue-imprison-criminals/ 4 http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/2020RS/fnotes/bil_0006/hb0356.pdf 5 https://www.facebook.com/LarryHogan/photos/a.396845987007237/3860589693966165/?type=3&thea ter 6 https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/conviction 7 https://www.apa-inc.org/update-conviction-rates/ 8 Idem ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 The challenges our city has faced in the past 5 years run deep. In my time in office, we have had three mayors, one of which was convicted for corruption, five Police Commissioners, one of which was jailed for tax evasion, the untimely killing of Freddie Gray and the subsequent uprising, a scathing 183-page report by the Department of Justice exposing a pattern and practice of discriminatory policing, the subsequent federal consent decree and dealing with the aftermath of one of the largest police corruption scandals in the history of the country – the Gun Trace Task Force. To say it has been a tumultuous time is an understatement. Nonetheless, as you will see from the data outlined below, our conviction rate and our stet and nol pros rate for violent crimes, guns, and even homicides are on a par with my past two predecessors, who faced less challenging circumstances. I am grateful for the work of my staff and for the partnership of people like you in the state legislature as we seek to make Baltimore a safer city. Turning to the data, below you will find the answers to the questions you asked. Given the city’s deeply concerning murder rate, I also include homicide data. Please note that per the APA standards, my office collects and reports data by case and/or tracking number not by the number of charges brought against a particular defendant. Hence, the data you’ve requested is reported by the number of cases my office handles in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City.9 The first data set, by number of cases, is for Crimes of Violence, which includes 73 categories of crime and is inclusive of violent gun crimes. The second data set, by number of cases, is for Gun Crimes, which includes 23 categories and is also inclusive of violent gun crimes. The third data set, by number of cases, is for Homicides, which includes 10 categories of homicides. Additionally, please note that for the sentence data requested for each case, we have provided an attachment for your review. With regard to your request pertaining to the amount of time each defendant actually spent incarcerated, as you are aware, we do not control that process. Judges set the sentence and conditions. Sometimes an individual is allowed out early on good behavior, or for parole, probation, etc. This request should therefore be made to the courts, corrections, parole, and probation authorities. We are happy to assist in any way. Lastly, we include an addendum with charts comparing homicide, gun, and violent crime data for the past ten years, so you can see that our conviction rates, nolle prosequi, and PBJ percentages are consistent with my two predecessors. We also include another addendum detailing the categories of crime for each data set. 9 We feel very confident about the accuracy of this data. Nonetheless, this was a large data request that we performed in a short span of time and we will continue to confirm the accuracy of the data to check for human error. ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 Please let me know if you have any questions. Sincerely, Marilyn Mosby Baltimore City State’s Attorney ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 Data Set 1: Crimes of Violence The following data is for cases relating to crimes of violence, and includes 73 categories of violent crime offenses. Summary: The data below shows that the office has had a conviction rate in or around 90% for violent offenses for the past three years. Very few cases resulted in probation before judgement. While an average of 29% of cases resulted in a nolle prosequi or were placed on the stet docket, this does not mean the case was dropped and/or dismissed in its entirety. The data shows that on average approximately 19% of the cases we dismissed, were either prosecuted by another jurisdiction, such as our federal partners, where there are more resources and sentences are more severe or the case is the subject of a plea deal in another case. Nonetheless, on average over half the cases that resulted in a nolle prosequi or were placed on the stet docket happened because a key victim or witness failed to appear. This data speaks to the need for more legislation to protect witnesses and end the “stop snitching” culture, something I have pushed for the past three legislative sessions. Finally, it is also clear from the attached sentencing data that defendants convicted of violent offenses do in fact receive lengthy sentences for those offenses. Q. 1. The number of crimes of violence 2017 – 1272 cases 2018 – 1089 cases 2019- 1111 cases Qs 2 and 3. The number of cases that resulted in a nolle prosequi and the number of cases placed in the stet docket 2017– 402 – 402 out of 1272 = 31% 2018 - 308 – 308 out of 1089 = 28% 2019 – 301 – 301 out of 1111 = 27% Q. 4. The number of cases that resulted in probation before judgement 2017 – 23 – 23 out of 1272 = 2% 2018 – 21 – 21 out of 1089 = 2% 2019 – 9 – 9 out of 1111 = 1% Qs 5 and 6. The number of cases that resulted in a guilty plea and the number of cases that resulted in a conviction (please note that per the APA standards, a guilty plea is a conviction) 2017 – 783 Guilty, 79 Not Guilty, 8 dismissed – 783 out of 870 = 90% conviction rate 2018 – 725 Guilty, 49 Not Guilty, 7 dismissed – 725 out of 781 = 93% conviction rate 2019 – 719 Guilty, 85 Not Guilty, 6 dismissed – 719 out of 810= 89% conviction rate ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 Q. 7. The sentence received for each disposition See separate attachment. There is no way to summarize this data so we have provided it in full. Q. 8. If a sentence included a period of incarceration, the actual amount of time a defendant was incarcerated Please contact the courts and corrections authorities to obtain this data from the courts/corrections. SAO does not control how much time someone serves. Q. 9. If a case resulted in a nolle prosequi or was placed on a stet docket, the rationale for entering each nolle prosequi or placing the case on the stet docket 2017: STET/NP REASONS 2017 Total = 402 cnt StetNolProsReasonDesc 9 Alternative to prosecution completed. 2 Defective charging document. 11 Insufficient Evidence - nexus 23 Insufficient Evidence - other 1 Negative laboratory report: other 5 No identification can be made of defendant. 5 No identification can be made of the defendant. 12 Other, not listed on form. 5 Police officer was a necessary witness and was not present. 1 Prosecuted elsewhere. 1 Prosecuted elsewhere. County 16 Prosecuted elsewhere. Federal 1 Prosecuted elsewhere. Juvenile 38 Pursuant to plea negotiations in another case. 1 Technician was a necessary witness and was not present. Witness/victim statement inconsistent with evidence or otherwise lacks 21 credibility. Witness/victim substantially changed prior statement or can't remember 22 facts. 218 Witness/victim was a necessary witness and did not appear. ClosedDT 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 Percentage 2.30% 0.51% 2.81% 5.87% 0.26% 1.28% 1.28% 3.06% 1.28% 0.26% 0.26% 4.08% 0.26% 9.69% 0.26% 2017 5.36% 2017 2017 5.61% 55.61% Highlights:  Victim/witness failure to appear were 56% of nolle prose/stet docket cases ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000  Prosecuted elsewhere (case passed to another jurisdiction or the federal government for prosecution) or the case was the subject of a plea deal in another case was 16% of nolle prose/stet docket cases 2018: STET/NP REASONS 2018 Total = 308 cnt StetNolProsReasonDesc 1 5th Amendment violation, motions hearing YES 1 Alternative to prosecution completed. 1 Defective charging document. 6 Insufficient Evidence - nexus 30 Insufficient Evidence - other 1 Negative laboratory report: DNA 2 Police officer was a necessary witness and was not present. 2 Prosecuted elsewhere. County 30 Prosecuted elsewhere. Federal 45 Pursuant to plea negotiations in another case. 1 Unconstitutional ID Procedure, motions hearing YES 1 Witness claimed 5th Amendment privilege. Evidence otherwise insufficient. Witness/victim statement inconsistent with evidence or otherwise lacks 17 credibility. Witness/victim substantially changed prior statement or can't remember 11 facts. 155 Witness/victim was a necessary witness and did not appear. ClosedDT 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 Percentage 0.33% 0.33% 0.33% 1.97% 9.87% 0.33% 0.66% 0.66% 9.87% 14.80% 0.33% 0.33% 2018 5.59% 2018 2018 3.62% 50.99% Highlights:  Victim/witness failure to appear was 51% of nolle prose/stet docket cases.  Prosecuted elsewhere (case passed to another jurisdiction or the federal government for prosecution) or the case was the subject of a plea deal in another case was 25% of nolle prose/stet docket cases. 2019: STET/NP REASONS 2019 Total = 301 cnt StetNolProsReasonDesc 3 4th Amendment violation, motions hearing YES 1 5th Amendment violation, motions hearing YES 5 Alternative to prosecution completed. 8 Defective charging document. 4 Insufficient Evidence – nexus ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** ClosedDT 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 Percentage 1.02% 0.34% 1.69% 2.71% 1.36% 443-984-6000 25 1 1 2 2 31 16 1 Insufficient Evidence – other Marital privilege claimed. Necessary physical evidence not available. Negative laboratory report: DNA Prosecuted elsewhere. County Prosecuted elsewhere. Federal Pursuant to plea negotiations in another case. Witness claimed 5th Amendment privilege. Evidence otherwise insufficient. Witness/victim statement inconsistent with evidence or otherwise lacks 13 credibility. Witness/victim substantially changed prior statement or can't remember 19 facts. 163 Witness/victim was a necessary witness and did not appear. 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 8.47% 0.34% 0.34% 0.68% 0.68% 10.51% 5.42% 0.34% 2019 4.41% 2019 2019 6.44% 55.25% Highlights:  Victim/witness failure to appear was 55% of nolle prose/stet docket cases  Prosecuted elsewhere (case passed to another jurisdiction or the federal government for prosecution) or the case was the subject of a plea deal in another case was 17% of nolle prose/stet docket cases Data Set 2: Firearm Offenses The following data is for cases relating to guns, and includes 23 categories of gun offenses. Summary: The data below shows that the office has had a conviction rate in or around 90% for firearm offenses for the past three years. Very few cases resulted in probation before judgement. While an average of 27% of cases resulted in a nolle prosequi or were placed on the stet docket, this does not mean the case was dropped and/or dismissed in its entirety. The data shows that on average, approximately 34% of the cases we dismissed, were either prosecuted by another jurisdiction, such as our federal partners, where there are more resources and sentences are more severe or the case is the subject of a plea deal in another case. Nonetheless, 25% of the cases that resulted in a nolle prosequi or were placed on the stet docket happened because a key victim or witness failed to appear. This data speaks to the need for more legislation to protect witnesses and end the “stop snitching” culture, something I have pushed for the past three legislative sessions. Finally, it is also clear from the attached sentencing data that defendants convicted of violent offenses do in fact receive lengthy sentences for those offenses. Q. 1. The number of crimes for firearm cases ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 2017 – 1315 2018 – 1224 2019- 1366 Qs. 2 and 3. The number of cases that resulted in a nolle prosequi and the number of cases placed in the stet docket 2017– 440 – 440 out of 1315 = 33% 2018 - 296 – 296 out of 1224 = 24% 2019 – 323 – 323 out of 1366 = 24% Q. 4. The number of cases that resulted in probation before judgement 2017 – 27 – 27 out of 1315 = 2% 2018 – 38 – 38 out of 1224 = 3% 2019 – 22 – 22 out of 1366 = 2% Qs 5 and 6. The number of cases that resulted in a guilty plea and the number of cases that resulted in a conviction (please note that per the APA standards, a guilty plea is a conviction) 2017 – 776 Guilty, 95 Not Guilty, 4 dismissed – 776 out of 875 = 89% conviction rate 2018 – 873 Guilty, 51 Not Guilty, 4 dismissed – 873 out of 928 = 94% conviction rate 2019 – 955 Guilty, 82 Not Guilty, 6 dismissed – 955 out of 1043 = 92% conviction rate Q. 7. The sentence received for each disposition See separate attachment. There is no way to summarize this data so we have provided it in full. Q. 8. If a sentence included a period of incarceration, the actual amount of time a defendant was incarcerated Please contact the courts and corrections authorities to obtain this data from the courts/corrections. SAO does not control how much time someone serves. Q. 9. If a case resulted in a nolle prosequi or was placement of the case on a stet docket, the rationale for entering each nolle prosequi or placing the case on the stet docket 2017: STET/NP REASONS 2017 Total = 440 cnt StetNolProsReasonDesc 7 4th Amendment violation, motions hearing NO 10 4th Amendment violation, motions hearing YES 1 5th Amendment violation, motions hearing YES ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** FirstClosed 2017 2017 2017 Percentage 1.7% 2.4% 0.2% 443-984-6000 5 6 26 47 2 3 2 4 2 28 39 5 69 2 32 Alternative to prosecution completed. Defective charging document. Insufficient Evidence - nexus Insufficient Evidence - other Necessary physical evidence not available. Negative laboratory report: firearms Exam. No crime committed. No identification can be made of defendant. No identification can be made of the defendant. Other, not listed on form. Police officer was a necessary witness and was not present. Prosecuted elsewhere. Prosecuted elsewhere. Federal Prosecuted elsewhere. Juvenile Pursuant to plea negotiations in another case. Witness/victim statement inconsistent with evidence or otherwise lacks 21 credibility. Witness/victim substantially changed prior statement or can't remember 6 facts. 105 Witness/victim was a necessary witness and did not appear. 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 2017 1.2% 1.4% 6.2% 11.1% 0.5% 0.7% 0.5% 0.9% 0.5% 6.6% 9.2% 1.2% 16.4% 0.5% 7.6% 2017 5.0% 2017 2017 1.4% 24.9% Highlights:  Victim/witness failure to appear was 25% of nolle prose/stet docket cases  Prosecuted elsewhere (case passed to another jurisdiction or the federal government for prosecution) or the case was the subject of a plea deal in another case was also 25% of nolle prose/stet docket cases 2018: STET/NP REASONS 2018 Total = 296 cnt StetNolProsReasonDesc 4 4th Amendment violation, motions hearing NO 8 4th Amendment violation, motions hearing YES 1 5th Amendment violation, motions hearing YES 4 Alternative to prosecution completed. 12 Defective charging document. 14 Insufficient Evidence - nexus 31 Insufficient Evidence - other 1 Negative laboratory report: DNA 1 Negative laboratory report: firearms Exam. 16 Police officer was a necessary witness and was not present. ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** FirstClosed 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 Percentage 1.4% 2.8% 0.3% 1.4% 4.2% 4.9% 10.8% 0.3% 0.3% 5.6% 443-984-6000 2 61 44 1 1 9 6 71 Prosecuted elsewhere. County Prosecuted elsewhere. Federal Pursuant to plea negotiations in another case. Unconstitutional ID Procedure, motions hearing YES Vacatur Statute Md. 8-301.1 Witness/victim statement inconsistent with evidence or otherwise lacks credibility. Witness/victim substantially changed prior statement or can't remember facts. Witness/victim was a necessary witness and did not appear. 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 0.7% 21.3% 15.3% 0.3% 0.3% 2018 3.1% 2018 2018 2.1% 24.7% Highlights:  Victim/witness failure to appear was 25% of nolle prose/stet docket cases  Prosecuted elsewhere (case passed to another jurisdiction or the federal government for prosecution) or the case was the subject of a plea deal in another case was 37% of nolle prose/stet docket cases 2019: STET/NP REASONS 2019 Total = 323 cnt StetNolProsReasonDesc 3 4th Amendment violation, motions hearing NO 22 4th Amendment violation, motions hearing YES 1 5th Amendment violation, motions hearing YES 8 Alternative to prosecution completed. 6 Defective charging document. 11 Insufficient Evidence - nexus 21 Insufficient Evidence - other 3 Laboratory report not available: DNA 3 Necessary physical evidence not available. 5 Negative laboratory report: DNA 7 Police officer was a necessary witness and was not present. 3 Prosecuted elsewhere. County 94 Prosecuted elsewhere. Federal 32 Pursuant to plea negotiations in another case. Witness/victim statement inconsistent with evidence or otherwise lacks 6 credibility. Witness/victim substantially changed prior statement or can't remember 9 facts. 83 Witness/victim was a necessary witness and did not appear. ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** FirstClosed 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 Percentage 0.9% 6.9% 0.3% 2.5% 1.9% 3.5% 6.6% 0.9% 0.9% 1.6% 2.2% 0.9% 29.7% 10.1% 2019 1.9% 2019 2019 2.8% 26.2% 443-984-6000 Highlights:  Victim/witness failure to appear was 26% of nolle prose/stet docket cases  Prosecuted elsewhere (case passed to another jurisdiction or the federal government for prosecution) or the case was the subject of a plea deal in another case was 40% of nolle prose/stet docket cases Data Set 3: Homicides The following data is for homicide cases, and is inclusive of 10 categories of homicide offenses. Summary: The data below shows that the office has had a conviction rate of 83% for homicides for the past three years. No cases result in probation before judgement. While an average of 12% of cases resulted in a nolle prosequi or were placed on the stet docket, this does not mean the case was dropped or dismissed in its entirety. The data shows that on average, 33% of cases were dismissed in order that the case be prosecuted by another jurisdiction, such as our federal partners, where there are more resources and sentences are likely to be more severe. Nonetheless, an average of 27% of the cases that resulted in a nolle prosequi or were placed on the stet docket happened because a key victim or witness failed to appear. This data speaks to the need for more legislation to protect witnesses and end the “stop snitching” culture, something I have pushed for the past three legislative sessions. Finally, it is also clear from the attached sentencing data that defendants convicted of violent offenses do in fact receive lengthy sentences for those offenses. Q 1. The number of homicide cases: 2017 – 105 2018 – 106 2019- 117 Q. 2 and 3. The number of cases that resulted in a nolle prosequi and the number of cases placed in the stet docket 2017– 10 – 10 out of 105 = 10% 2018 - 11 – 11 out of 106 = 10% 2019 – 16 – 16 out of 117 = 14% Q. 4. The number of cases that resulted in probation before judgement There are no homicide cases that have resulted in probation before judgement. Qs 5 and 6. The number of cases that resulted in a guilty plea and the number of cases that resulted in a conviction (please note that per the APA standards, a guilty plea is a conviction) ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 2017 – 80 Guilty. 15 Not Guilty. 0 dismissals – 80 out of 95 = 84% conviction rate 2018 – 64 Guilty. 13 Not Guilty. 0 dismissals – 64 out of 77 = 83% conviction rate 2019 – 83 Guilty. 16 Not Guilty. 2 dismissals – 83 out of 101 = 82% conviction rate Q. 7. The sentence received for each disposition See separate attachment. There is no way to summarize this data so we have provided it in full. Q. 8. If a sentence included a period of incarceration, the actual amount of time a defendant was incarcerated Please contact the courts and corrections authorities to obtain this data from the courts/corrections. SAO does not control how much time someone serves. Q. 9 If a case resulted in a nolle prosequi or was placement of the case on a stet docket, the rationale for entering each nolle prosequi or placing the case on the stet docket 2017: STET/NP REASONS 2017 Total = 10 cnt StetNolProsReasonDesc 1 Other, not listed on form. 7 Prosecuted elsewhere. Federal 2 Witness/victim was a necessary witness and did not appear. FirstClosed 2017 2017 2017 Percentage 10.00% 70.00% 20.00% Highlights:  Victim/witness failure to appear was 20% of nolle prose/stet docket cases  Prosecuted elsewhere (case passed to another jurisdiction or the federal government for prosecution) was 70% of nolle prose/stet docket cases 2018: STET/NP REASONS 2018 Total = 11 cnt StetNolProsReasonDesc 1 Defective charging document. 1 NCR Not Criminally Responsible 1 Other, not listed on form. 1 Insufficient Evidence - other 1 Prosecuted elsewhere. Federal Witness/victim statement inconsistent with evidence or otherwise lacks 1 credibility. 1 Witness/victim substantially changed prior statement or can't remember facts. 4 Witness/victim was a necessary witness and did not appear. ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** FirstClosed 2018 2018 2018 2018 2018 Percentage 9.09% 9.09% 9.09% 9.09% 9.09% 2018 2018 2018 9.09% 9.09% 36.36% 443-984-6000 Highlights:  Victim/witness failure to appear was 37% of nolle prose/stet docket cases  Prosecuted elsewhere (case passed to another jurisdiction or the federal government for prosecution) was 9% of nolle prose/stet docket cases 2019: STET/NP REASONS 2019 Total = 16 cnt StetNolProsReasonDesc 1 4th Amendment violation, motions hearing YES 2 Defective charging document. 1 Insufficient Evidence - nexus 3 Insufficient Evidence - other 3 Prosecuted elsewhere. Federal Witness/victim statement inconsistent with evidence or otherwise lacks 1 credibility. 5 Witness/victim was a necessary witness and did not appear. FirstClosed 2019 2019 2019 2019 2019 Percentage 6.25% 12.50% 6.25% 18.75% 18.75% 2019 2019 6.25% 31.25% Highlights:  Victim/witness failure to appear was 31% of nolle prose/stet docket cases  Prosecuted elsewhere (case passed to another jurisdiction or the federal government for prosecution) was 19% of nolle prose/stet docket cases ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 Addendum 1: 10 year comparison 1. The bars are represented on the first Y-axis, the line is represented on the second Y-Axis Violent Crime Cases Notes    The conviction rate for violent crimes has consistently remained at 89% or higher over the last 10 years. Stet, Nol Pross, and PBJs have decreased over the ten-year period. Only 1% of cases in 2019 resulted in a PBJ. 2. The bars are represented on the first Y-axis, the line is represented on the second Y-Axis ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 Gun Cases Notes    The conviction rate for gun crimes has consistently remained at around 90% over the last 10 years. 2018 marked the highest conviction rate over a 10 year period at 94%. The strong work carried into 2019 with the highest number of convictions over a 10 year period at 955 while maintaining a 92% conviction rate Stet, Nol Pros, and PBJs have remained steady over the ten-year period. The number of Stet and Nol Pros cases has decreased by 37% from 2015 to 2019. Further, the number of Stet and Nol Pros cases in 2019 was a 10 year low at 323 cases, only 24% of cases overall. The number of PBJs for gun cases in 2019 is at a 10 year low, only 21 cases resulted in a PBJ, 1% of all cases overall. 3. The bars are represented on the first Y-axis, the line is represented on the second Y-Axis Homicide Cases Notes    Despite some fluctuations, and challenging circumstances, the SAO homicide conviction rate has remained steady. The Stet and Nol Pros numbers have remained consistent over a 10 year period. There are no PBJs for homicide cases. ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 Addendum 2: Categories Statute §14-101 Crimes of Violence CJIS code §3-503 Abduction (Abduct Child Under 12) 1 1005 Attempt Abduct Child Under 12 1A1005 1st Degree Arson 1 6500 Attempted 1st Degree Arson 1A6500 Kidnapping 3 1005 Attempted Kidnapping 3A1005 Kidnapping – Child Under 16 4 1005 Attempted Kidnapping – Child Under 16 4A1005 §2-207 Manslaughter 1 0910 §2-207 Manslaughter (victim is minor) 1M0910 §2-209 Manslaughter – Neg. Manslaughter Auto/Boat 1 0909 §2-209 Manslaughter – Neg. Manslaughter Auto/Boat (victim is minor) 1M0909 §2-201 1st Degree Murder 1 0990 §2-201 1st Degree Murder (victim is minor) 1M0990 §2-205 Attempted 1st Degree Murder 2 0910 §2-205 Attempted 1st Degree Murder (victim is minor) 2M0910 §2-204 2nd Degree Murder 1 1107 §2-204 2nd Degree Murder (victim is minor) 1M1107 §2-206 Attempted 2nd Degree Murder 2 0920 §2-206 Attempted 2nd Degree Murder (victim is minor) 2M0920 §3-303 1st Degree Rape 1 1102 §3-309 Attempted 1st Degree Rape 2 1120 §3-304 2nd Degree Rape 2 1103 §3-310 Attempted 2nd Degree Rape 2 1110 §6-102 §3-502 §3-503 ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 §3-402 Robbery (includes attempt) 2 0700 §3-403 Armed Robbery (includes attempt) 2 0705 §3-405 Carjacking 1 0825 Attempted Carjacking 1A0825 Armed Carjacking 1 0826 Attempted Armed Carjacking 1A0826 1st Degree Sexual Offense (before 9/30/2017) 2 1102 Attempted 1st Degree Sexual Offense (before 9/30/2017) 2A1102 2nd Degree Sexual Offense (before 9/30/2017) 2 3600 §3-405 §3-305 §3-306 Attempted 2nd Degree Sexual Offense (before 9/30/2017) 2A3600 §4-204 Firearm Use in Felony/Crime of Violence 1 5299 §3-601 1st Degree Child Abuse – Severe Physical Injury 1 0334 Attempted 1st Degree Child Abuse – Severe Physical Injury 1A0334 1st Degree Child Abuse – Death (over 13) 1 1108 Attempted 1st Degree Child Abuse – Death (over 13) 1A1108 1st Degree Child Abuse – Death (under 13) 1 1109 Attempted 1st Degree Child Abuse – Death (under 13) 1A1109 §3-601 §3-601 §3-602 §3-602 §6-202 §3-1102 §3-1102 Sexual Abuse Minor – parent w/perm/temp care/custody Att. Sex. Abuse Minor – parent w/perm/temp care/custody 1 0322 1A0322 Sexual Abuse Minor – household/family member 1 0922 Att. Sex. Abuse Minor – household/family member 1A0922 Home Invasion 1 1338 Attempted Home Invasion 1A1338 Sex Trafficking – Take/Cause 1 0786 Attempt Sex Trafficking – Take/Cause 1A0786 Sex Trafficking – Compensation 1 0788 ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 Attempt Sex Trafficking – Compensation 1A0788 Sex Trafficking – Explicit Performance 1 0754 Attempt Sex Trafficking – Explicit Performance 1A0754 Sex Trafficking – Another Gov’t ID 1 0756 Attempt Sex Trafficking – Another Gov’t ID 1A0756 Sex Trafficking – Guardian 1 0789 Attempt Sex Trafficking – Guardian 1A0789 Sex Trafficking – Force/Fraud 1 0787 Attempt Sex Trafficking – Force/Fraud 1A0787 Sex Trafficking – Benefit Financially 1 0758 Attempt Sex Trafficking – Benefit Financially 1A0758 Sex Trafficking – Conspire/Aid/Abet 1 0761 Attempt Sex Trafficking – Conspire/Aid/Abet 1A0761 Forced Marriage 1 1726 Attempt Forced Marriage 1A1726 Benefit – Forced Marriage 1 1727 Attempt Benefit – Forced Marriage 1A1727 Conspire – Forced Marriage 1 1728 Attempt Conspire – Forced Marriage 1A1728 Conspire – Benefit – Forced Marriage 1 1729 Attempt Conspire – Benefit – Forced Marriage 1A1729 §3-315 Sex Abuse Minor – Continuing Course of Conduct 2 1136 §3-202 1st Degree Assault 1 1420 Statute Title 4, Subtitle 2 Offenses CJIS code §4-203 Handgun in Vehicle 1 0175 §4-203 Loaded Handgun in Vehicle 1 1454 §3-1102 §3-1102 §3-1102 §3-1102 §3-1102 §3-1102 §3-1103 §3-1103 §3-1103 §3-1103 ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 §4-203 Handgun on Person 1 5212 §4-203 Loaded Handgun on Person 1 1455 §4-204 Firearm Use in Felony/Crime of Violence 1 5299 §4-208 Firearm Demonstration Public Place 3 5299 CHARGECODE Written Charge Fire Arms 1 0175 Handgun, transport in a vehicle RIFLE/SHOTGUN POSSESS-MENTAL DISORDER/VIOLENT BEHAVIOR [PS 5] 1 0439 (1 0439) 1 0487 CDS: DISTRIBUTE ETC. WITH FIREARM [27 281A] (1 0487) 1 0493 FIREARM/DRUG TRAFFICKING CRIME [CR 5] (1 0493) 1 0642 Reg Firearm - unlawful sale/transfer 1 0692 POSSESSION OF FIREARMS [CR 5] (1 0692) 1 1106 Possession of regulated firearm, felony MACHINE GUN AGGRESSIVE & OFFENSIVE PURPOSE/NOT REGISTERED [CR 1 1314 4] (1 1314) 1 1454 LOADED HANDGUN IN VEHICLE 1 1455 LOADED HANDGUN ON PERSON 1 1609 FIREARM-POSS-CRIM VIO/FEL CONV 1 1610 RIFLE/SHOTGUN-POSS W/FEL CONV 1 1612 Removal of serial number from firearm REGULATED FIREARM STOLEN - POSSESS/SELL/TRANSFER/DISPOSE OF [PS 1 2801 5] (1 2801) 1 5212 Wearing, carrying and transporting a handgun FIREARM PERSON:SELL/RENT & TRANSFER BEFORE 7 DAY EXPIRATION [27 1 5240 442] (1 5240) FIREARM SELL, RENT AND TRANSFER WHEN APPLICATION ON HOLD [27 1 5250 442] (1 5250) 1 5285 Possession of regulated firearm or ammunition by a minor TRANSPORT REGULATED FIREARM INTO STATE:ILL SALE-TRAFFICKING [PS 1 5295 5] (1 5295) 1 5299 Handgun, use in a felony or crime of violence 1A5240 ATT-FIREARM/SALE/PERSON CON-HANDGUN: WEAR/CARRY & TRANSPORT IN VEHICLE/PUBLIC ROADS 1C0175 [CL] (1C0175) 1C0487 CON-CDS: DISTRIBUTE ETC. WITH FIREARM [CL] (1C0487) 1C0493 CON-FIREARM/DRUG TRAFFICKING CRIME [CL] (1C0493) ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL*** 443-984-6000 1C5212 2 0239 2 2030 2 3015 2 5212 2 5299 2C5212 3 5250 3 5255 3 5260 3 5299 6 5210 CON-WEAR, CARRY AND TRANSPORT HANDGUN UPON THEIR PERSON [CL] (1C5212) FIREARMS-ACCESS BY MINORS [CR 4] (2 0239) Possession of regulated firearm, COV or certain felony CDS offenses BURGLARY/SECOND DEGREE/FIREARM [CR 6] (2 3015) RIFLE/SHOTGUN:UNREGISTERED [PS 5] (2 5212) MACHINE GUN-USE FOR CRIME [CR 4] (2 5299) CON-RIFLE/SHOTGUN:UNREGISTERED [CL] (2C5212) ASSAULT PISTOL ROSTER VIO [CR 4] (3 5250) DETACH MAG OVER 10 RNDS ASSAULT PISTOL/MAG. USE [CR 4] (3 5260) FIREARM DEMONST PUB PLACE [27 36G] (3 5299) HANDGUN-WEAR/CARY INFL ALC [27 36E] (6 5210) CJIS Code 1 0007 1 0912 1 0990 Written Charge Homicide MURDER [CL] MURDER-1ST DEG/ARSON MURDER - FIRST DEGREE MURDER-SECOND DEGREE [27 411] 1 0999 (1 0999) 1 1107 MURDER-SECOND DEGREE 1 1313 ASSAULT [CL] (1 1313) 1M1107 MURDER-SECOND DEGREE MURDER-FIRST DEGREE [27 407] (2 2 0900 0900) 2 0912 MURDER-1ST DEG/BURN BLDG MURDER-1ST 3 0912 DEGREE/BEG/RAPE/SOD ETC ***PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL***