New Insights into California Arrests: Trends Disparities, and County Differences, Technical Appendix
Database
This is the content currently stored in the post and postmeta tables.
object(Timber\Post)#3875 (44) {
["ImageClass"]=>
string(12) "Timber\Image"
["PostClass"]=>
string(11) "Timber\Post"
["TermClass"]=>
string(11) "Timber\Term"
["object_type"]=>
string(4) "post"
["custom"]=>
array(5) {
["_wp_attached_file"]=>
string(20) "1218mlr-appendix.pdf"
["wpmf_size"]=>
string(7) "1008629"
["wpmf_filetype"]=>
string(3) "pdf"
["wpmf_order"]=>
string(1) "0"
["searchwp_content"]=>
string(118564) "New Insights into California Arrests Trends, Disparities, and County Differences Technical Appendices CONTENTS Appendix A. Statewide Arrest Types in Depth Appendix B. Statewide Arrest Demographics in Depth Appendix C. County Differences in Arrests Appendix D. Other Demographic Analyses Appendix E. Data and Methods Magnus Lofstrom, Brandon Martin, Justin Goss, Joseph Hayes, and Steven Raphael Supported with funding from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation Appendix A. Statewide Arrest Types in Depth Arrest trends Arrest rates have dropped dramatically in California since reaching peaks in 1989 and 1990. As Figure A1 shows, the overall arrest rate reached a high of 8,188 arrests per 100,000 residents in 1989 and, with the exception of the period 2002-2008, has since been on a steady decline. In 2016 it reached a historic low, of 3,428. While both felony and misdemeanor arrest rates have declined significantly since the early 1990s and have reached all-time low rates, misdemeanor arrests are the main contributor to the overall drop. The felony arrest rate declined from 2,135 in 1989 to 897 in 2016, while the misdemeanor arrest rate dropped from 6,053 to 2,530 over the same period. Though similar in terms of percentage decrease (57.9 percent and 58.8 percent respectively), the misdemeanor arrest rate decrease of 3,523 represents about three-quarters of the decline in the total arrest rate. Changes in arrest offenses Figure A1 also shows that while most arrests in California are for misdemeanor offenses, their share of all arrests fluctuates. The share of misdemeanors arrests ranged between 66 percent and 78 percent between 1980 and 2016. Interestingly, after having stayed mostly below 70 percent since the early 1990s, the share of misdemeanor arrests jumped from 66 percent in 2014 to 74 percent in 2015. The reclassification of a number of drug and property offenses from felony (or wobblers) to misdemeanors, as a result of Prop 47, is likely the main factor behind this sudden and noticeable recent change. FIGURE A1 Arrest rates have been on a downward trend since the early 1990s, and are now at historic lows Arrest Rate (Arrests per 100,000 Residents) 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% Misdemeanor Felony Total Misdemeanor Share of all Arrests SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. Among arrests for felony offenses, the dramatic and relatively consistent drop in the property arrest rate stands out. Figure A2 shows it reaching a 1980-2016 period peak in 1981 at a rate of 751 felony property arrests per 100,000 residents. The felony property arrest rate declined in the early 1980s before increasing until 1989, when it reached almost 750 again. Since then the felony property arrest rate has been on a quite consistent sharp downward trend, and now stands at 189 felony property arrests per 100,000 residents. Figure A2 also reveals significant declines since the late 1980s and early 1990s in the felony arrest rates for drugs and violent offenses. The Felony-Drug arrest rate dropped from 600 in 1988 to 99 in 2016. The Felony-Violent arrest rate dropped from 533 in 1990 to 291 in 2016. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 2 Felony Arrest Rate FIGURE A2 The Felony-Property arrest rate has been on a quite consistent long term downward trend since 1989 800 700 600 Drugs 500 Other Property 400 Supervision 300 Violent Warrant 200 Weapons 100 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of felony arrests per 100,000 residents. The composition of felony arrests have also changed markedly. Figure A3 shows that in 1980, 44.9 percent of felony arrests were for a property offense. By 1990, this share dropped to 33.7 percent and by 2016, 21.1 percent of all felony arrests were for property offenses. Felony arrests for drug offenses grew from 16.6 percent of felony arrests in 1980 to 23.8 percent in 2010, and by 2014 had climbed to 27.6 percent. With the passing and implementation of Prop 47 in November of 2014, the Felony-Drug arrest figure dropped sharply, and now stands at 11.1 percent of felony arrests. While arrests for violent offenses made up less than one-quarter of felony arrests in 1980, it now represents almost one-third of arrests for felonies. The noticeable increase is recent, starting right after passage of Prop 47 passed. From 2014 to 2015, the felony arrest share jumped from 22.9 percent to 31.5 percent. It is worthwhile noting that the increase in the share of arrests for Felony-Violent offenses is due to the much larger drop in overall felony arrests (by about 131,000), compared to the decline in arrests for felonious violent offenses (by nearly 1,600) between 2014 and 2015. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 3 Share of Felony Arrests FIGURE A3 The Most Common Felony Arrest Type Has Shifted from Property to Violent Offenses 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Other Supervision Warrant Violent Weapons Drugs Property SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Percentages are shares of felony arrests. Recent years have also seen major shifts in the number and composition of misdemeanor arrests. The most notable changes in Figure A4 are the drop in misdemeanor arrest rates for traffic and alcohol related offenses, and the recent increase in the drug arrest rate. The traffic arrest rate decreased from its peak in 1990 of 2,444 to 642 in 2016. Law enforcement officers are also arresting fewer individuals for misdemeanor alcohol related offenses. The Misdemeanor-Alcohol arrest rate is on a long-term downward trend, declining from 1,403 in 1980 to 229 in 2016. It is not surprising to see an increase in the Misdemeanor-Drug arrest rate after 2014, given that Prop 47 reclassified a number of drug and property offenses from felonies (or wobblers) to misdemeanors: it almost doubled, increasing from 239 in 2014 to 460 in 2016. There is, however, almost no change in the post-Prop 47 Misdemeanor-Property arrest rate; it went from 179 in 2014 to 182 in 2016. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 4 FIGURE A4 California saw significant drops in misdemeanor arrest rates for traffic and alcohol related offenses but the MisdemeanorDrug arrest rate recently went up 3000 Misdemeanor Arrest Rate 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of misdemeanor arrests per 100,000 residents. While traffic arrests are the most common misdemeanor arrest category, their share of the total has dropped from 36.1 percent in 1980 to 25.4 percent in 2016 (Figure A5). Alcohol-related misdemeanor arrests fell even faster over the period. In 1980, alcohol-related misdemeanors accounted for more than one-quarter of total misdemeanor arrests; they had fallen to one in eleven misdemeanor arrests in 2016. Conversely, the relative share of misdemeanor arrests for Failure to Appear in court (FTA), or warrants, jumped from 5.7 percent in 1980 to 17.6 percent in 2016. While the increase in the FTA share of misdemeanor arrests between 1980 and 1990 was primarily due to a notable increase in the arrest rate (from 304 to 623), the increase in the share since then is primarily due to a larger decrease in the overall misdemeanor arrest rate, compared to the relative stabilization in the rate of law enforcement FTA arrests. Last, although a relatively small share of misdemeanor arrests, the share for battery/assault arrests almost doubled between 1980 and 2016, from 4.4 percent to 8.1 percent. As Figure A4 shows, this was not caused by an increase in the misdemeanor battery/assault arrest rate, which remained fairly stable during that period, but rather by the significant decrease in the overall misdemeanor arrest rate. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 5 Share of Misdemeanor Arrests FIGURE A5 Traffic and alcohol related arrests as shares of misdemeanor arrests have dropped substantially 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Other FTA/Warrant Battery/Assault Property Drugs Alcohol Traffic SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Percentages are shares of misdemeanor arrests. The most common arrest offenses A closer look at the data reveals that, despite decreasing markedly in absolute number over several years, misdemeanor arrests for traffic offenses, especially driving under the influence, represented the most common arrests in California (Table A1) during most of the years examined. Most recently, however, misdemeanor arrests for drug violations (nearly 164,000) moved to the top of the list of most common arrest offenses. The other most common misdemeanor arrests are for public intoxication and battery and assaults. Burglary (with about 84,000 arrests) represented the most common felony arrest in 1980. By 2016, assaults (more than 87,000) had moved to the top of the list, with the number of arrests for burglary dropping to slightly above 23,000. Arrests for drug offenses (such as possession, sales, giving to a minor and transportation of narcotics and dangerous drugs) were among the most common felony arrests for most years over the period studied, though no drug offenses were among the five most common felony arrest offense post-Prop 47 period. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 6 TABLE A1 Misdemeanor arrests for traffic offense declined but continue to be among the most common arrests in California 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Misdemeanors DUI Drunk Selected Traffic Petty Theft Outside Warrant 302,868 242,331 146,163 113,739 57,569 DUI Miscellaneous Traffic Drunk Petty Theft CI/CO Ordinances 353,886 294,310 190,715 141,905 111,515 DUI Miscellaneous Traffic Drunk Assault and Battery Failure to Appear/Non Traffic 178,431 138,748 114,023 80,994 80,076 DUI Miscellaneous Traffic Drunk Failure to Appear/Non Traffic Assault and Battery 193,280 174,266 107,714 102,030 88,037 Other Drug Law Violations DUI Miscellaneous Traffic Failure to Appear/Non Traffic Assault and Battery 163,959 125,963 110,463 106,894 80,968 Felonies Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Burglary 84,160 Assault 106,781 Assault Theft 51,047 Narcotics 91,136 Dangerous Drugs Assault 48,955 Burglary 79,911 Narcotics Motor Vehicle Theft 29,514 Theft 67,085 Burglary Robbery 26,715 Motor Vehicle Theft 47,221 Theft SOURCES: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register (1980-2016). Number of Arrests 108,808 57,866 53,014 46,978 43,672 Arrest Offense Assault Dangerous Drugs Burglary Theft Narcotics Number of Arrests 92,030 63,983 52,716 45,459 39,562 Arrest Offense Assault Other Felonies Theft Outside Warrant Burglary Number of Arrests 87,415 37,841 27,643 26,290 23,209 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 7 Appendix B. Statewide Arrest Demographics in Depth Race/Ethnicity There is pronounced racial disparity in arrests in California, but the gaps are growing smaller. In 1980, the arrest rate of African-Americans was 16,653 per 100,000 residents, considerably higher than the rate for Latinos (9,294) and whites (5,553). In other words, there were 11,000 more arrests per 100,000 African-Americans than there were arrests per 100,000 whites that year—an arrest rate of African-Americans that is three times higher than that of whites. There are also significant differences between Latinos and whites. The Latino arrest rate was 1.7 times greater than the white arrest rate in 1980. Arrest rates grew for all three groups in the 1980s, but more so for African Americans, increasing the disparity. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the African American arrest rate was more than three times greater than the white arrest rate. Since the 1990s, arrest rates have declined substantially, and more so among African Americans, reducing some of the differences across race/ethnicity from that peak. In 2016, the African American arrest rate was 9,765— lower than the peak—though still three times greater than the white arrest rate of 3,235. The 2016 Latino arrest rate (3,606) is now 1.11 times higher than the white rate. Lastly, the race/ethnic group labeled Other (which includes those of Asian, Pacific Islander, American Indian and Alaska Native origin) continues to have the lowest arrest rates in California.1 After growing from about 11,000 in 1980 to about 15,400 in 1989, the difference between the African-American and white arrest rates has dropped remarkably, and now stands at about 6,500—the lowest observed between 1980 and 2016. The arrest rate difference between Latinos and whites dropped dramatically, and is now about one-tenth of what it was at its peak in 1990, having fallen from 4,100 more arrests per 100,000 residents to 370. FIGURE B1 There is pronounced racial disparity in arrests in California, but the gaps are growing smaller 25000 20000 Arrest Rate 15000 10000 5000 African American Latino Other White 0 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. 1We observe small number of arrests of individuals in these race/ethnic groups for some offenses. Hence, to ensure no personally identifiable information is released, we combined these groups into an Other category. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 8 California’s changing demographics drive at least part of these shifts. The state’s Latino population more than doubled its share of the total between 1980 and 2016, going from 19.3 to 38.9 percent. During this period, the Latino share of total arrests also grew. The Latino share grew from 25.9 percent of all arrests in 1980 to 41.4 percent in 2016 (Figure B9). Beginning in 2002, Latinos accounted for the largest share of arrests in California. Adult whites represented 36.0 percent of all arrests in the state in 2016 while the African-American share of all arrests was 16.3 percent in 2016 (down from a peak of 19.1 in 1988). FIGURE B2 Like its share of California’s population, the arrest share of Latinos is growing 60% 50% Share of Arrests (by Race) 40% 30% 20% African American Latino Other White 10% 0% SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Figure shows the race/ethnic group shares of all annual arrests. While most of the declines in all arrests are due to the fall in misdemeanor arrests, the decrease in felony arrests among African Americans stands out, and accounts for 48 percent of the overall peak-to-2016 decline in the African American arrest rate. Figure B1 shows the change in felony and misdemeanor arrest rates, by race/ethnic group, between the peak and 2016, as well as from 1980 and 2016. The African American felony arrest rate dropped a remarkable 5,693 from its peak (in 1989) and 2016 (from 8,922 to 3,229). In other words, there were 5,693 fewer felony arrests of African Americans per 100,000 African American residents in 2016 compared to 1989. By comparison, the second largest peak-to-2016 decline in arrests for felony offenses, 1,642, was among Latinos. The felony arrest rate for whites and the Other race/ethnicity group also declined over the same period (638 and 786 respectively). Misdemeanor rates also declined across race/ethic groups. The African American misdemeanor rate was nearly halved (from 12,801 to 6,535, a decline of 48.9 percent). The Latino rate dropped 5,051 accounting for about 75 percent of the group’s decline in arrests. And again, the white (down 2,814) and Other (down 2,697) misdemeanor arrest rates also fell, accounting for almost 80 percent of those groups’ decrease in the overall arrest rate. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 9 FIGURE B3 Most of the declines in arrest rates are due to the drops in misdemeanor arrests African American 0 Latino Other White -1000 Period Changing Arrest Rates -2000 -3000 -4000 -5000 -6000 -7000 1980-2016 Change, Felony Peak-2016 Change, Felony 1980-2016 Change, Misdemeanor Peak-2016 Change, Misdemeanor SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. Noticeable drops in arrests for Felony-Drugs and property offenses are the main contributors to the decrease in felony arrests. Since the declines are greater among African Americans and Latinos, these are also key contributors to the decrease in ethnic/racial disparity in overall arrests. Among felony arrests, the highest arrest rates for all four race/ethnic groups in 1980 were for property offenses (Figure B4). The Felony-Property arrest rates have since plummeted; from 2,687 to 640 in 2016 for African Americans, from 908 to 203 for Latinos, from 517 to 161 for whites, and from 259 to 68 for all others. The significantly slower rate of decrease in the Felony-Violent arrest rates has led to felony violent arrest rates now being greater than the felony property arrest rates for all four groups. In 2016, arrests for felony property offenses accounted for about one-fifth of all felony arrests for all four groups while arrests for violent offenses make up roughly one-third. Arrests for Felony-Drugs also have fallen significantly, particularly for African Americans. The African American Felony-Drugs arrest rate declined by more than 90 percent from its peak in the late 1980s to 2016 (3,088 to 287). The Latino felony drug arrest rate also fell over the period from a high of 710 to 104 (a decrease of about 85 percent). Among whites and the Other race group, the Felony-Drug arrest rates also dropped significantly from their peaks, as measured in percentage terms—77.3 percent and 75.7 percent respectively. As measured as changes in the arrest rates, the respective peak-to-2016 decreases, however, are much smaller than the decreases among African Americans and Latinos. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 10 FIGURE B4 Declines in arrests for drug and property offenses are the main contributor to the decrease in felony arrests Felony Arrest Rate African American 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Drugs Other Property Supervision Violent Warrant Weapons Felony Arrest Rate - Latino 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Drugs Other Property Supervision Violent Warrant Weapons 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 Felony Arrest Rate - White 600 500 Felony Arrest Rate - Other 500 Drugs 450 400 Drugs 400 Other 350 Other 300 200 Property Supervision Violent 300 250 200 150 Property Supervision Violent 100 Warrant 100 50 Warrant 0 Weapons 0 Weapons 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. The noticeable bump in 1990 in the felony arrest rate of the racial/ethnic Other group is driven by an increase in individuals classified in that group in Los Angeles. At this point, it is unclear what factor explains the temporary jump. Most of the drop in misdemeanor arrests between 1980 and 2016 stems from fewer misdemeanor arrests for alcohol and traffic offenses. All groups have seen sharp decreases in misdemeanor traffic arrests since the early 1990s. The largest peak-to-2016 decline is among Latinos, where the Misdemeanor-Traffic arrest rate fell by 2,410 (from 3,232 in 1990 to 822 in 2016). The drop was nearly as large among African Americans, for whom the Misdemeanor-Traffic arrest rate went from 3,568 in 1983 to 1,345 in 2016. The white and Other MisdemeanorTraffic arrest rates dropped from 2,318 in 1985 to 488 in 2016 (whites) and 1,497 in 1990 to 331 in 2016 (Other race/ethnicity group). The peak-to-2016 decreases in Misdemeanor-Alcohol arrests were almost as large; dropping by 2,045 arrests per 100,000 residents for Latinos, 1,698 for African-Americans, 870 among whites, and by 699 among the group consisting of all other races/ethnicities. Lastly, the data also reveal that the Misdemeanor-Drug arrest rates for all groups, roughly doubled between 2014 and 2016. Among African Americans, the rate went from 426 to 886, while among whites it jumped from 279 to 548. For Latinos the misdemeanor drug arrest rate went from 240 to 452, while it increased from 75 to 138 for the Other race/ethnic group. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 11 FIGURE B5 Sharp decreases in misdemeanor arrests for alcohol and traffic offenses account for most of the drop in misdemeanor arrests Misdemeanor Arrest Rate African American 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic Misdemeanor Arrest Rate Latino 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 Misdemeanor Arrest Rate White 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic Misdemeanor Arrest Rate Other 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of misdemeanor arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. Examining the relative share of arrests by race/ethnicity and type of arrest offense reveal several noteworthy trends and differences across groups (Table B1). It is important to keep in mind that the trends in arrests shares are at least partly due to demographic changes, as discussed above. Nonetheless, the shares gives us relevant information about who is arrested in California, and for what types of offenses. One of the most notable changes is the drop in the African-American share of felony drug arrests. As Table B1 shows, this share fell nearly in half between 1990 and 2016, from 31.3 percent of all Felony-Drug arrests to 16.5 percent. In fact, it dropped by even more than half when compared to its 1988 peak of 36.7 percent. The white share of Felony-Drug arrests also declined, from 53 percent in 1980 to 34 percent in 2016. Meanwhile, the Latino share of Felony-Drug arrests has been growing, from 16.7 percent in 1980 to 31.1 percent in 1990, and now stands at 41.3 percent of all Felony-Drug arrests. The decline in the African-American share of felony violent arrests is also noteworthy. In 1980, whites and African-Americans represented roughly 1/3 each of all arrests for felony violent offenses (35 and 34 percent respectively). Both shares have dropped, but by more among African Americans. Today, about 29 percent of Felony-Violent arrests are of whites, while 22 percent are of African Americans. The changes in the share of Felony-Warrant arrests also stand out; for whites, it declined from 61.5 percent in 1980 to 38.2 percent in 2016 while increasing among the other three groups, including a doubling of the share for PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 12 Latinos. Similarly, the white share of Felony-Weapon arrests decreased over the same period, from 46.2 percent to 25.7, while it increasing among the other three groups. Finally, the distribution of Misdemeanor-Traffic and Property arrests by race/ethnicity has changed over time. While whites accounted for 58.3 percent of misdemeanor traffic arrests in 1980, they now account for only 29.0 percent. The share of Latinos almost doubled over the same period, going from 26.8 percent to 50.3 percent. The decrease in the African American share of Misdemeanor-Drug arrests is also notable, dropping from 20.6 percent in 1980 to 11 percent in 2016. For property crimes, while whites had the largest share of arrests for both felony and misdemeanors in 1980 (46.8 percent and 53.3 percent respectively), their property offenses shares mostly decreased over the period 1980-2016. One exception is the recent increase in the white share of misdemeanor arrests for property offenses, which increased from 31.2 percent in 2010 to 37.0 percent in 2016 (an upward trend that started in 2009). PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 13 TABLE B1 Shares of arrests by offense level and race/ethnicity Year 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 White 46.8% 35.6% 33.9% 33.5% 32.4% 53.1% 33.8% 38.7% 37.9% 34.5% 35.5% 29.9% 31.4% 28.6% 28.6% 46.2% 37.6% 31.7% 25.1% 25.7% 61.5% 45.7% 38.0% 36.8% 38.2% 52.2% 37.0% 38.0% 34.4% 34.9% 40.3% 45.7% 39.7% Felony Offenses African American Latino Property 27.3% 23.8% 25.0% 32.8% 23.2% 35.6% 20.5% 39.4% 19.3% 42.2% Drugs 28.9% 16.7% 31.3% 31.1% 23.3% 34.0% 18.0% 38.8% 16.5% 41.3% Violent 33.7% 28.2% 28.9% 35.1% 22.0% 40.2% 22.4% 42.8% 22.4% 42.5% Weapons 20.7% 30.1% 21.5% 34.8% 18.1% 44.3% 20.0% 50.2% 22.9% 47.0% Warrant 20.5% 16.0% 29.5% 22.0% 23.9% 32.9% 23.5% 34.0% 21.9% 34.2% Supervision 21.4% 24.3% 35.1% 25.4% 29.7% 29.7% 26.4% 35.4% 23.4% 37.5% Other 16.3% 40.5% 22.2% 27.8% 20.8% 34.0% Other 2.1% 6.5% 7.4% 6.6% 6.1% 1.3% 3.8% 4.1% 5.3% 7.7% 2.7% 6.1% 6.4% 6.2% 6.6% 3.1% 6.2% 5.9% 4.7% 4.5% 2.0% 2.9% 5.2% 5.7% 5.6% 2.2% 2.5% 2.6% 3.9% 4.2% 2.9% 4.3% 5.6% PPIC.ORG" White 53.3% 38.9% 33.6% 31.2% 37.0% 55.1% 40.2% 45.3% 42.6% 45.3% 53.7% 42.2% 38.7% 33.5% 32.7% 54.2% 47.3% 47.8% 46.7% 46.1% 59.2% 51.0% 41.8% 34.9% 38.8% 58.3% 49.9% 36.9% 30.9% 29.0% 55.3% 37.9% 40.5% Misdemeanor Offenses African American Latino Property 18.7% 22.9% 17.0% 34.2% 18.6% 37.9% 16.2% 42.4% 18.9% 36.7% Drugs 20.6% 22.6% 20.3% 35.6% 17.8% 33.1% 13.7% 38.5% 11.0% 38.6% Assault/Battery 19.7% 23.7% 23.0% 28.6% 19.3% 35.7% 19.7% 40.7% 20.2% 40.4% Alcohol 11.3% 31.2% 13.1% 35.4% 10.5% 36.7% 10.4% 37.3% 11.0% 36.5% FTA/Warrant 18.8% 20.0% 19.0% 26.6% 18.0% 35.9% 21.2% 39.5% 16.4% 40.3% Traffic 12.7% 26.8% 9.6% 34.4% 10.1% 46.5% 11.2% 50.3% 12.0% 50.3% Other 21.1% 20.7% 21.4% 32.7% 17.8% 35.2% Other 5.0% 9.9% 9.9% 10.2% 7.4% 1.8% 3.8% 3.8% 5.3% 5.1% 2.8% 6.1% 6.3% 6.2% 6.7% 3.3% 4.3% 5.0% 5.5% 6.4% 2.0% 3.4% 4.3% 4.4% 4.5% 2.2% 6.0% 6.5% 7.6% 8.7% 2.9% 7.9% 6.5% Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 14 Felony Offenses Misdemeanor Offenses White African American Latino Other White African American Latino 2010 33.2% 19.2% 42.4% 5.3% 33.6% 18.3% 2016 34.4% 18.9% 40.7% 5.9% 38.0% 19.4% SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. 41.9% 36.1% Other 6.2% 6.4% Age groups Like the offenses individuals are arrest for—and the population of California—the demographic composition of individuals arrested has changed since 1980. Regarding the age of arrestees, the data show a precipitous drop in arrests of younger suspects—both juveniles (17 and younger) and those between the ages of 18 and 24 (Table B2). Among juveniles, the number of annual arrests plummeted between 1980 and 2016, falling from about 258,000 to about 60,000 (a decrease of 76.7 percent). Among those between 18 and 24, arrests dropped by more than one-half (52.2 percent) from roughly 611,000 to almost 292,000. Arrests of individuals 25 to 29 also decreased, from about 274,000 to 239,000 (a decline of 12.8 percent). The number of arrests increased for all older age groups. It is especially striking for those between 50 and 59 years of age, where the number nearly doubled, from about 75,000 to more than 144,000 (an increase of 93.3 percent). While the direction of these trends mirrors those of the state’s population—California is aging, and the younger age groups now represent smaller shares of the population than they did in 1980—the magnitudes of the changes in arrests are significantly greater than the shifts in the state’s population. For example, the population share of the youngest age group (0-17) declined but only by 3.5 percentage points between 1980 and 2016 (declining from 27 percent to 23.5). The share of California’s population between 50 and 59 increased but only by about 3 percentage points (from 10.1 percent to 13.1 percent) over the same period. TABLE B2 Arrests of the state’s youngest residents have dropped drastically Year 0-17 18-24 25-29 Age Group 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or Older 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 257,893 236,832 214,903 165,843 59,988 611,071 731,002 445,894 455,156 291,982 274,240 489,631 228,672 263,996 239,001 281,772 631,092 417,719 348,214 352,984 125,626 220,057 265,068 278,230 213,973 74,596 67,334 79,495 140,062 144,165 33,094 33,175 23,857 35,509 45,345 Change, 1980-2016 (Number) -197,905 -319,089 -35,239 71,212 88,347 Change, 1980-2016 (Percent) -76.7% -52.2% -12.8% 25.3% 70.3% SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. 69,569 93.3% 12,251 37.0% PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 15 Figure B6 shows that arrest rates in California are highest among young adults but that the differences across adult age groups have decreased. While the arrest rate decreased between 1980 and 2016 for all age groups, the largest declines as measured by percent change, were among juveniles and 18-24 year olds. For juveniles, the arrest rate dropped from 4,011 arrest per 100,000 juveniles in 1980 to 648 in 2016, a decrease of 83.8 percent. Among 18-24 year olds, the arrest rate declined from 18,692 to 6,914, a drop of 63 percent. Regarding differences across groups, the data show that while the arrest rate of juveniles in 1980 was higher than that of 50-59 year olds (4,011 and 3,101, respectively) in 2016 the juvenile arrest rate was less than one-quarter of the rate for 50-59 year olds (648 and 2,807, respectively). FIGURE B6 Arrest rates have dropped the most for the state’s younger population 25,000 Arrest Rate 20,000 15,000 10,000 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 5,000 0 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or Older SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. The decline in arrest rates across all age groups does not apply to felonies, however. While the rates continue to be lower than those among younger adults, felony arrest rates increased for the age groups of individuals 30 and older. The 50-59 age group exhibited the greatest percentage increase; its felony arrest rate rose from 271 in 1980 to 568 in 2016 (109.6 percent). The decreases in the felony arrest rates of juveniles and the youngest adult group, 18-24, are striking. In 1980, the juvenile felony arrest rate stood at 1,526. It now stands at 218, a decrease of 85.7 percent. The corresponding change among 18-24 year olds is a decline from 4,692 to 1,945 (58.5 percent). Also noteworthy is that, while the felony arrest rate of 18-24 year olds was significantly higher that of 25-29 year olds in the 1980s and 1990s, the pattern shifted in the 2000s, and the rate is now lower than that of 25-29 year olds. Furthermore, while the felony arrest rate of the youngest adults in California was more than three times higher than the felony arrest rate of 30-39 year olds, it is now just slightly higher (1,945 and 1,820, respectively). PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 16 FIGURE B7 While still lower than younger adults, the felony arrest rates went up between 1980 and 2016 for age groups 30 and older 6,000 Felony Arrest Rate 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1,000 0 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or Older SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of felony arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. The age group trends for misdemeanor arrests are quite similar to the broader arrest trends (Figure B8). The biggest decreases are among juveniles and young adults. For juveniles, the misdemeanor arrest rate continuously declined between 1980 and 2016, dropping from 2,484 in 1980 to 430 in 2016 (a decrease of 82.7 percent). Among 18-24 year olds, the misdemeanor arrest rate fell by more than 9,000 arrests per 100,000 residents; from 13,999 to 4,969 (a decline of 64.5 percent). The data also reveal some recent increases in misdemeanor arrests. While the misdemeanor arrest rate of 50-59 year olds decreased between 1980 and 2016, from 2,830 to 2,239, since 2000 it has been slowly increasing. In 2000, it stood at 1,731, in 2010 it was 2,155 and in 2016 it stood at 2,239. Misdemeanor arrests increased somewhat between 2010 and 2016 for other age groups as well: from 6,693 to 6,911 for 25-29 year olds, from 4,600-4,775 among 30-39 year olds, and 456 to 490 among those 60 and older. FIGURE B8 While misdemeanor arrest rates declined for most age groups, it increased for those 50 and older 18,000 Misdemeanor Arrest Rate 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-29 40-49 50-59 60 or Older SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 17 Gender Historically, male adult arrest rates have been dramatically higher than the corresponding female arrest rates, but the gaps are decreasing (Figure B9). The male arrest rate was more than six times higher than the female arrest rate in 1980 (12,253 and 1,840, respectively). After reaching a peak in 1989 of 13,741, the adult male arrest rate quite steadily declined to 5,270 by 2016 (a decrease of 61.6 percent). The female adult arrest rate also peaked in 1989 and has since declined, but less so. In 1989 it stood at 2,631 but fell more slowly to 1,603, a drop of 39.1 percent. While still significantly higher, the adult male arrest rate is now only 3.3 times higher than the female adult rate, a ratio that has held quite steady since 2010. As of 2016, male and female adult arrest rates are the lowest observed between 1980 and 2016. FIGURE B9 Male arrest rates are substantially higher than female arrest rates, but the gap is decreasing 16,000 14,000 12,000 Female Male Total Arrest Rate 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. In terms of the relative share of total arrests, while the vast majority continue to be of males, an increasing share of arrests are of females (Figure B10). Roughly one in eight arrests of adults were of females in 1980. This share has since steadily grown and now almost one in four adult arrests are of females. FIGURE B10 While the vast majority of arrests in California continue to be of males, an increasing share of arrests are of females 100% 90% 80% 86.6% 83.8% 80.7% 77.1% 76.5% Share of Arrests (by Gender) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 13.4% 16.2% 19.3% 22.9% 23.5% 10% 0% 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Figure shows the shares of all (felony and misdemeanor) annual arrests by gender, for females and males separately. Female Male PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 18 The offenses for which males and females are arrested for are significantly different and exhibit some different trends. The highest felony arrest rates in 1980 among both men and women were for property offenses (Table B3). Furthermore, the felony property arrest rate is much higher for men, and while both have dropped significantly over the last decade, the decrease among men is greater. The male Felony-Property arrest rate was 1,310 in 1980, nearly seven times greater than the female Felony-Property arrest rate of 188. By 2016, the FelonyProperty arrest rates had dropped to 287 and 92 respectively for men and women (corresponding to decreases of 78.1 percent and 50.1 percent). With the stronger downward trend among men, the male arrest rate for felony property crimes is now slightly more than three times greater than that of women. Violent offenses now account for the plurality of felony arrests for both males and females. While in 1980 the male arrest rate for Felony-Property offenses (1,310) was almost twice the male Felony-Violent arrest rate (699), since the mid-1990s it has been lower, and is now 38 percent lower than the male Felony-Property arrest rate (287 and 464, respectively). Felony arrests for violent offenses by females increased sharply from a low below 100 arrests per 100,000 females in the mid-1980s to a 1997 peak of 146. As of 2016, it stood at 120. Arrests for Felony-Drug arrests have dropped sharply after reaching peaks in the late 1980s. Male Felony-Drug arrest rate dropped from 803 per 100,000 males in 1990 to 165 in 2016 (Table B3). Among women, the FelonyDrug arrest rate dropped from 173 to 34 over the same period. Other notable gender felony arrests trends include a decrease in Felony-Weapons arrests among men over the last decades while among women it increased. The male Felony-Weapon arrest rate however continues to be significantly higher than the female rate, 102 and 8 respectively. Felony-Supervision arrest rates for both men and women are now considerably higher than they were in 1980; increasing from 19 to 76 for men and from 2 to 8 among women. However, they are now significantly lower than their peaks in 2008, when they reached 174 and 22 respectively. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 19 TABLE B3 While felony arrests for some offenses have gone up, arrest rates for the most common offenses are down Felony Offense Category Males Year Drugs Property Violent Weapons Supervision Warrant Other 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 Change, 1980-2016 (Rate) Change, 1980-2016 (Percent) 460.2 803.1 600.7 516.7 165.2 -295 -64.1% 1310.5 1149.9 559.0 460.6 287.1 -1,023 -78.1% 698.9 964.7 702.8 543.7 464.4 -235 -33.6% 116.2 118.5 90.4 116.1 101.9 18.8 66.6 116.7 143.3 76.1 -14 -12.3% 57 304.8% 61.5 118.2 152.3 122.3 106.9 45 73.8% 272.9 280.4 242.7 273.5 247.2 -26 -9.4% Year Drugs Property Violent Females Weapons Supervision Warrant Other 1980 92.5 188.1 73.9 5.8 2.0 9.3 30.7 1990 173.3 228.8 102.1 6.6 8.1 24.7 51.5 2000 155.1 175.7 131.6 6.1 15.0 37.5 57.0 2010 135.2 178.3 123.6 8.9 14.5 32.6 64.4 2016 33.8 92.2 119.6 7.9 8.0 27,2 62.6 Change, 1980-2016 (Rate) -59 -96 46 2 6 18 32 Change, 1980-2016 (Percent) -63.5% -51.0% 61.8% 36.2% 300.0% 192.5% 103.9% SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of felony arrests per 100,000 residents, by offense category, of the relevant demographic group. Misdemeanor arrest rates for traffic and alcohol offenses are down sharply for both men and women compared to the 1980s and early 1990s. Table B4 shows that the male arrest rate for misdemeanor traffic offenses dropped from 3,505 in 1980 to 981 in 2016 (a decline of 72 percent). For women the rate decreased from 379 to 306 (a drop of 19.3 percent). For both men and women, the misdemeanor arrest rate for alcohol offenses declined even more: from 2,569 to 364 for men and from 268 to 94 for women (decreases of 85.8 percent and 64.9 percent respectively). Misdemeanor arrests for property offenses are also down noticeably, by more than 60 percent for both men and women. Among men, the Misdemeanor-Property arrest rate decreased from 669 in 1980 to 222 in 2016, and among women it dropped from 372 to 142. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 20 Trends for drug misdemeanors are noticeably different from traffic, alcohol, and property arrest trends. Among men, the Misdemeanor-Drug arrest rate grew in the 1980s, from 485 in 1980 to a peak of 730 in 1988. In subsequent years, the rate both dipped and rose, sometimes sharply, until it settled at 717 in 2016. The Misdemeanor-Drug arrest trend among women is similar to that of the men, but with somewhat less fluctuation in the 1980s and 1990s. Interestingly, the female Misdemeanor-Drug arrest rate increased sharply between 2013 and 2016, almost doubling, going from 106 to 206. Also noteworthy, while the female Misdemeanor-Assault/battery arrest rate is not dramatically different from what it was in the 1990s, and lower than it was in the 2000s, it is now higher than it was in 1980. Among men, the Misdemeanor-Assault/battery arrest rate has continuously decreased since the late 1980s and is now, at 306, close to the lowest observed since 1980 (302 in 2013). TABLE B4 Misdemeanor arrest rates for traffic and alcohol offenses are down sharply Year 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 Traffic 3,505 4,197 1,719 1,621 981 Alcohol 2,569 1,534 854 635 364 Misdemeanor Offense Category Males Drugs Property FTA/ Warrant 485 669 550 559 636.5 1,064 577 286 738 547 199 717 717 222 667 Assault/ Battery 410 463 368 357 306 Other 1,125 1,592 988 756 564 Change, 1980-2016 (Rate) Change, 1980-2016 (Percent) -2,524 -72.0% -2,205 -85.8% 232 47.8% -447 -66.8% 117 21.3% -104 -25.4% -561 -49.9% Year 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 Traffic 379 695 333 486 306 Alcohol 268 212 149 145 94 Drugs 76 162 155 148 206 Females Property 372 365 181 197 142 FTA/ Warrant 64 184 173 215 227 Assault/ Battery 64 96 110 116 107 Other 216 308 212 195 168 Change, 1980-2016 (Rate) -73 -174 130 -230 163 43 -48 Change, 1980-2016 (Percent) -19.3% -64.9% 171.1% -61.8% 254.7% 67.2% -22.2% SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of misdemeanor arrests per 100,000 residents, by offense category, of the relevant demographic group. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 21 The above discussion identifies a number of instances where female arrest rates have increased more, or decreased less, than male arrest rates. An important consequence of these trends is that women increasingly make up a greater share of arrests in California. Figure B11 shows the trends in the female shares of felony arrests by felony offense groups. The two most notable increases in the female share of felony arrests are for property and violent offenses. The share of Felony-Property arrests more than doubled between 1980 and 2010 (from 12.9 to 28.1 percent). Since then, the female share has come down somewhat, to 24.5 percent. The female share of felony violent offenses stayed quite constant around 10 percent in the 1980s and then started a steady climb, to 20.6 percent of all Felony-Violent arrests in California. The recent drop in the female share of Felony-Drug arrests is also noticeable in Figure B6. After staying relatively steady at slightly above 20 percent since the late 1990s, it decreased from 21.5 percent in 2014 to 17.1 percent in 2016. FIGURE B11 The female share of felony arrests has increased for most felony offense groups 30% Female Shares of Felony Arrests 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% Drugs Other Property Supervision Violent Warrant Weapons 0% 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Figure shows the female shares of felony arrests by felony offense groups. The female share of arrests for misdemeanor offenses is also increasing, doubling for several misdemeanor offense groups (Figure B12). The female share of arrests for Misdemeanor-Alcohol offenses has been steadily increasing, from 9.7 percent in 1980 to 20.7 percent in 2016. The female share of arrests for Misdemeanor-Traffic offenses increased from 10 to 23.9 percent over the same period, while the female share of misdemeanor arrests for FTA or an outstanding warrant went from 10.6 percent 25.6 percent. The data also reveal significant increases in the female shares of arrests for Misdemeanor-Assault/battery as well as drug offenses. These shares increased from 13.9 to 26.1 percent between 1980 and 2016 for assault/battery offenses, and from 13.8 percent to 22.5 percent for Misdemeanor-Drug offense. Lastly, the offense with the highest female share of arrests— Misdemeanor-Property offenses—grew considerably in the 1990s and the 2000s, reaching almost 50 percent in 2010. Since then it has declined to 39.3 percent. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 22 FIGURE B12 The female share of arrests for misdemeanor offenses are increasing, doubling for several misdemeanor offense groups 60% Female Shares of Misdemeanor Arrests 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Figure shows the female shares of misdemeanor arrests by misdemeanor offense groups. Appendix C. County Differences in Arrests The analyses of arrests trends in California in the prior appendices reveal noticeable changes over time, including reduced differences across age, gender and race/ethnicity categories. They also show that in spite of the decreased variation across groups, substantial disparities remain. In this appendix we examine how arrests differ across counties in California with a focus on the most recent data currently available (2016). Before proceeding, it is important to note two qualifications for the analysis which follows. First, in counties with small populations, arrest statistics can be heavily skewed by unusual events or the actions of few individuals. For that reason, we limit our county analysis of race/ethnicity differences to the 49 counties with overall populations of at least 25,000. Second, many factors are likely to contribute to these differences, including crime rates, the composition of crimes, the number of law enforcement officers, policing practices, demographics, fiscal considerations, and jail capacity. As we noted elsewhere, understanding the role of determinants of arrest rate differences across counties and communities is fundamental to a better understanding of law enforcement discretion and racial disparities. The purpose of this report, however, is to provide a starting point for such a discussion by providing basic information on arrests: what individuals are arrested for, and who is being arrested, and how these differ across the state. Subsequent research will begin to delve further into the drivers behind these differences. The number of arrests per 100,000 residents varies substantially across counties (Figure C1). The counties with the five highest total arrest rates (the height of the bar, which is felony and misdemeanor arrests combined) are found in the counties of Lake (7,906 annual arrests per 100,000 county residents), Siskiyou (6,862), Shasta (6,672), Trinity (6,559), and Butte (6,394). The lowest total arrest rates are found mostly in large counties. The five lowest rates are in Los Angeles (2,800), Sacramento (2,797), San Francisco (2,603), Santa Clara (2,576), and Riverside (2,479) counties. As the figure indicates, misdemeanor arrests make up the majority of all arrests in most counties. In fact, at least two-thirds of all arrests are misdemeanors in all but six counties: Lassen (66.2 percent), Yuba (63.5 percent), PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 23 Sacramento (63.1 percent), San Francisco (62.3 percent), Trinity (58.8 percent) and Sierra (49.3 percent). The highest shares of misdemeanor arrests are found in San Luis Obispo (85.1 percent), Santa Barbara (83.5 percent), San Mateo (82.7 percent) and Sonoma (82.1 percent). The counties with the highest felony rates are all rural counties: Trinity (with 2,705 felony arrests per 100,000 residents), Sierra (2,451), Siskiyou (2,127), Lake (1,913), and Yuba (1,853). The five counties with the lowest felony arrest rates are mostly large urban counties, with three in the San Francisco Bay Area: San Luis Obispo (752), Orange County (659), Santa Clara (655), San Mateo, (573) and Marin (556). Given that most arrests are for misdemeanor offenses, it is not surprising that some of the counties with the highest (and lowest) total arrest rates also have the highest (and lowest) misdemeanor arrest rates. Among the counties with the highest misdemeanor arrest rates we see Lake (with 5,993 misdemeanor arrests per 100,000 residents), Butte (5,159), Shasta (5,016), Alpine (4,965) and Kern (4,928). The lowest rates are in Contra Costa (1,972), Santa Clara (1,921), Sacramento (1,765), Riverside (1,690) and San Francisco (1,622). FIGURE C1 Most of California’s lowest arrest rates are in the larger counties 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Misdemeanor Felony Felony and Misdemeanor Arrest Rates Lake Siskiyou Shasta Trinity Butte Tuolumne Tehama Kern Colusa Alpine Mendocino Santa Barbara Humboldt Kings Del Norte Imperial Tulare Stanislaus Yuba San Luis… Solano Glenn Sierra Modoc Fresno Sonoma Plumas Santa Cruz Sutter Inyo Merced San Bernardino Calaveras Amador Yolo Ventura Napa San Benito Mariposa Madera Monterey Lassen Nevada El Dorado San Diego San Mateo San Joaquin Alameda Marin Orange Placer Contra Costa Mono Los Angeles Sacramento San Francisco Santa Clara Riverside SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents. A closer look at arrest offenses reveals that county differences in felony drug and violent arrest rates contribute prominently to differences in felony arrest rates. For example, the difference in felony drug arrests between the county with the highest rate (Lake, with 496 felony drug arrests per 100,000 residents) and the lowest rate (Marin, with a felony drug arrest rate of 48) of 448 is between one-quarter and one-third of the difference in the overall felony arrest rate between the counties with the highest and lowest felony arrest rate (Table C1). Of roughly the same magnitude is the 510 felony violent arrests per 100,000 residents difference between the counties with the highest rate (Yuba, 690) and the lowest rate (San Mateo, 180). The table also shows great disparity in the felony supervision arrest rate. While differences in misdemeanor drugs arrests also contribute significantly to county differences in misdemeanor arrest rates, differences in arrests for traffic offenses and FTA/warrant play bigger roles. Ranging between 1,210 and 1,471 arrests per 100,000 residents, the highest Misdemeanor-Traffic arrest rates are mostly in small rural counties (Solano, Amador, Tehama, Humboldt, and Lake). The lowest traffic arrest rates—between PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 24 376 and 486—are found in a mix of rural and urban counties (San Benito, Santa Cruz, Contra Costa, Sacramento, and Ventura). The highest misdemeanor arrest rates for FTA/warrants, between 1,164 and 1,586, are also found in California’s small and rural counties: Kings, Butte, Siskiyou, Lake, and Tuolumne. While the absolute lowest rates occur in small rural counties with populations too low to include in our analysis, we see a mix of rural and urban eligible counties among those with the lowest Misdemeanor-FTA/warrant arrest rates: San Benito (181), Sacramento (197), El Dorado (245), Riverside (266), and Marin (271). The distinction between counties with high and low Misdemeanor-Drug arrest rates does not occur so discernibly along the lines of small/rural versus large/urban; the highest rates are found in Kings, Plumas, Lake, Ventura and Tulare while the lowest are in San Francisco, Sierra, Amador, San Joaquin, Trinity and Los Angeles. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 25 TABLE C1 County differences in Felony-Drug and Violent arrest rates contribute prominently to differences in county felony arrest rates High P90 P75 Median P25 P10 Low Property 339 268 221 178 151 128 112 Drugs 496 278 188 108 76 66 48 Violent 690 473 394 326 252 211 180 Felony Arrest Rates Weapons Supervision 140 417 100 119 81 98 59 48 40 26 34 14 23 3 Warrant 239 184 131 79 47 37 11 Other 800 387 249 198 155 114 84 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 227 448 510 139 211 263 70 112 143 117 67 41 414 228 716 105 147 273 72 84 94 High/Low P90/P10 P75/P25 High P90 P75 Median P25 P10 Low 3.03 2.08 1.47 Property 321 256 219 182 162 88 65 10.43 4.18 2.48 Drugs 1,285 944 775 535 421 336 35 3.84 6.12 133.84 2.25 2.99 8.40 1.57 2.03 3.80 Misdemeanor Arrest Rates Assault/Battery Traffic Alcohol 508 1,471 1,146 406 1,204 741 350 1,122 402 253 866 264 210 616 213 151 487 136 124 376 46 21.00 4.91 2.79 FTA/Warrant 1,586 949 669 520 391 292 181 9.55 3.40 1.61 Other 1,311 604 464 368 307 231 179 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 257 1,249 168 608 56 354 385 256 140 1,096 718 506 1,101 605 189 1,405 658 278 1,131 374 157 High/Low 4.98 36.28 4.11 3.92 25.05 8.77 7.30 P90/P10 2.91 2.81 2.69 2.48 5.45 3.25 2.62 P75/P25 1.35 1.84 1.66 1.82 1.89 1.71 1.51 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents in 2016. It is not surprising that the demographic composition of suspects arrested also varies substantially across counties given the overall demographic differences across counties. However, population differences alone are unlikely to be the sole contributor to arrest differences. While a contributing factor to county differences in race/ethnic shares of arrests, demographic compositional differences are likely to have a modest impact on county arrest rate PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 26 differences across gender and age categories as there are relatively small differences in age and gender distributions across counties in California. The counties with the highest female arrest rates tend to also to be the same small rural counties with the state’s highest overall arrest rates. These include Tuolumne (with 4,210 female arrests per 100,000 female residents), Lake (4,130), Siskiyou (3,824), Shasta (3,772) and Butte (3,644). The female arrest rates in the counties with the lowest female arrest rates are roughly ¼ of those in the counties with the highest rates; Los Angeles (1,199), Riverside (1,162), Santa Clara (1,142), Mono (1,046) and San Francisco (982). While across-county differences in arrest rates vary by age group (Table C2), a commonality is that for each age group the arrest rates of the counties in the top decile (the 5-6 counties with the highest arrest rates) are about 2-3 times higher than the arrest rates of the counties in the bottom decile (the 5-6 counties with the lowest arrest rates). For example, the county felony arrest rate for 25-29 year olds in the top decile is 5,341 (roughly corresponding to the Mendocino and Tuolumne rates) is 2.60 times greater than the bottom decile felony arrest rates of 2,053 for this age group (corresponding to the number of felony arrests of 25-29 year olds in San Francisco and San Diego). The disparity across counties is more striking if we look at the difference in these felony arrest rates. There are 3,288 more arrests of 25-29 year olds per 100,000 county residents of that age in the small counties of Mendocino and Tuolumne than in San Francisco or San Diego. We can also discern from Table C2 that the magnitude of the broader differences in arrest rates across counties is to a large extent driven by two age groups, those between 25 and 29 and those between 30 and 39. These are the age groups with the highest arrest rates (for both felony and misdemeanor arrests), and are the age groups with the greatest differences across counties. For example, the top decile misdemeanor arrest rates (roughly the rates of Shasta, Tuolumne or Siskiyou) for these age groups are 13,016 (25-29 year olds) and 11,286 (30-39 year olds). These arrest rates are more than 8,000 misdemeanor arrests per 100,000 residents greater than those in the counties with the bottom decile arrest rates of 5,680 and 3,860 respectively (approximately the rates of Los Angeles and Alameda). TABLE C2 The largest differences in arrest rates across counties are among arrestees between the ages of 25 and 39 Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest 0-17 1,516 1,218 1,080 836 629 530 396 18-24 13,570 11,312 9,342 7,793 6,532 5,732 3,860 Overall Arrest Rates 25-29 30-39 40-49 25,421 21,602 13,331 18,222 15,712 10,246 14,472 11,585 7,742 12,242 9,699 6,288 9,367 6,578 4,181 8,024 5,504 3,451 5,762 3,268 2,934 50-59 7,599 5,767 4,866 3,905 2,842 2,321 1,931 60 or Older 2,017 1,124 947 713 535 468 367 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 1,120 688 452 9,710 5,580 2,809 19,660 10,198 5,104 18,334 10,207 5,007 10,398 6,795 3,562 5,668 3,445 2,023 1,650 656 412 High/Low P90/P10 P75/P25 3.83 3.52 2.30 1.97 1.72 1.43 4.41 2.27 1.54 6.61 2.85 1.76 4.54 3.94 2.97 2.48 1.85 1.71 5.50 2.40 1.77 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 27 Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest 0-17 382 348 310 239 171 149 70 18-24 4,411 3,100 2,648 1,995 1,698 1,491 1,016 25-29 6,998 5,341 3,950 3,037 2,393 2,053 1,508 Felony Arrest Rates 30-39 40-49 7,496 3,790 4,630 2,466 3,398 1,911 2,597 1,291 1,879 1,048 1,372 849 1,133 556 50-59 1,512 1,172 969 700 520 456 326 60 or Older 261 211 148 117 93 72 57 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 312 3,395 5,490 6,363 3,234 1,186 198 1,610 3,288 3,258 1,617 715 140 950 1,556 1,519 863 449 203 139 55 High/Low P90/P10 P75/P25 Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest 5.44 4.34 2.33 2.08 1.82 1.56 0-17 1,224 914 811 568 457 362 259 18-24 10,456 8,501 7,153 5,598 4,629 3,999 2,845 4.64 6.61 6.82 4.64 2.60 3.37 2.90 2.57 1.65 1.81 1.82 1.86 Misdemeanor Arrest Rates 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 18,423 15,031 10,226 6,217 13,016 11,286 7,946 4,727 11,150 8,512 6,340 3,940 8,685 7,276 4,632 2,981 7,097 4,875 3,125 2,232 5,680 3,860 2,409 1,697 3,710 2,018 1,919 1,437 4.55 2.93 1.60 60 or Older 1,920 931 772 542 434 362 302 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 966 7,612 14,714 13,013 8,307 4,780 552 4,502 7,336 7,426 5,537 3,030 354 2,524 4,052 3,637 3,215 1,707 1,618 569 338 High/Low 4.74 3.68 4.97 7.45 5.33 4.33 6.36 P90/P10 2.53 2.13 2.29 2.92 3.30 2.79 2.57 P75/P25 1.77 1.55 1.57 1.75 2.03 1.76 1.78 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents in 2016. As discussed above, arrest rates in California differ dramatically across race/ethnic groups, they also vary significantly across the state’s counties, across these groups (Table C3). The white overall arrest rate in the counties with the highest arrest rates (top decile) is 2.81 times higher than those in the lowest decile, and the difference in overall arrest rates is greater than 4,000 arrest per 100,000 residents. This difference, however, is substantially smaller than the across-county difference in the African American arrest rate. In the top-decile counties in the African American arrest rate is more than 26,000 arrests per 100,000 African American residents, 3.32 times higher than the African American arrest rate in the counties with the lowest rates. For comparison, the PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 28 Latino arrest rate difference between top and bottom-decile counties is about 2,900. It should be pointed out that the highest African American arrest rates are found in small counties, with especially small African American populations. High arrest rates in these cases can be caused by a small number of arrests. However, as Table C4 shows, the greater county difference is evident if we compare the counties in the top quartile of African-American arrest rates to those in the bottom quartile. Furthermore, we observe a number of relatively large counties where the difference between the overall African American arrest rates is at least 10,000 more than the overall white arrest rate: San Mateo, San Francisco, Santa Barbara and Santa Clara. While Latino arrest rates are higher than white arrest rates in California, the data suggest that there are a number of counties where the Latino arrest rate is lower than the white arrest rate. In fact, there are 32 counties where this holds true, including some relatively large counties such as San Bernardino, Sacramento, and San Bernardino. However, there are also a number of large counties where the Latino arrest rate is at least 1,000 more than the white arrest rate: Santa Clara, Fresno, Alameda and Orange County. There are three counties where the Latino arrest rate is twice that of whites (San Mateo, Marin and Santa Clara), and none where it is at least three times that of whites. Table C3 also highlights that the higher African American arrest rates holds for virtually all counties in California. Only two of the smallest counties examined, Lassen and Del Norte, had arrest rates for African Americans that were lower than those of whites. The African American arrest rate was at least double the white arrest rate in 45 of the 49 counties examined, three times greater in 33 counties, four times greater in 21 counties, and five times greater in 13 counties. While some of the greatest disparity is in small rural counties (such as Glenn and Nevada), it also includes urban counties like San Mateo and San Francisco. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 29 TABLE C3 Differences in Felony-Drug and Violent arrest rates contribute prominently to differences in felony arrest rates Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest White 7,704 6,657 5,924 4,033 3,009 2,368 2,046 Overall Arrest Rates African Latino American 6,329 38,710 5,412 26,057 4,978 21,603 4,106 15,152 3,455 9,972 2,499 7,852 354 1,818 Other 10,697 6,336 3,769 1,949 1,545 1,019 789 Group-White Difference African Latino American Other -1,375 31,006 2,993 -1,245 19,399 -321 -945 15,680 -2,155 73 11,119 -2,084 446 6,963 -1,464 131 5,484 -1,349 -1,692 -228 -1,257 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 5,658 4,289 2,915 5,975 2,914 1,523 36,891 18,205 11,631 9,907 5,318 2,224 High/Low P90/P10 P75/P25 Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest 3.8 2.81 1.97 White 2,315 1,710 1,439 934 745 537 335 17.9 21.3 2.17 3.32 1.44 2.17 Felony Arrest Rates African Latino American 2,171 13,620 1,483 8,163 1,201 6,150 926 4,163 816 3,310 744 2,748 42 265 13.5 6.22 2.44 Other 3,404 1,736 1,009 501 366 284 211 Group-White Difference African Latino American Other -143 11,305 1,089 -227 6,453 26 -239 4,711 -430 -9 3,229 -433 72 2,566 -379 207 2,211 -253 -292 -70 -123 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 1,980 1,173 695 2,129 739 384 13,356 5,416 2,840 3,193 1,453 643 High/Low P90/P10 P75/P25 6.9 51.2 3.19 1.99 1.93 1.47 51.5 16.1 2.97 6.13 1.86 2.76 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 30 Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest White 6,030 5,067 4,373 3,056 2,283 1,799 1,540 Misdemeanor Arrest Rates African Latino American 4,749 25,532 4,205 19,486 3,744 15,527 3,041 10,282 2,544 6,606 1,793 4,640 312 979 Other 7,293 4,770 2,722 1,434 1,141 745 578 Group-White Difference African Latino American Other -1,281 19,502 1,263 -862 14,419 -297 -628 11,154 -1,650 -15 7,226 -1,622 260 4,323 -1,143 -6 2,841 -1,054 -1,229 -561 -962 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 4,490 3,268 2,089 4,437 2,412 1,201 24,553 14,846 8,921 6,715 4,025 1,582 High/Low 3.9 15.2 26.1 12.6 P90/P10 2.82 2.35 4.20 6.40 P75/P25 1.91 1.47 2.35 2.39 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents in 2016. Examining the 2016 arrest data at the county level makes clear that arrest rates in California vary dramatically across the state. It shows that counties differ widely in the offenses for which suspects are arrested for, as well as the demographics of those arrested. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 31 Appendix D. Other Demographic Analyses TABLE D1 Arrest Rates by Year and Demographic Group Group White 0-17 Female White 0-17 Male White 18-24 Female White 18-24 Male White 25-29 Female White 25-29 Male White 30-39 Female White 30-39 Male White 40-49 Female White 40-49 Male White 50-59 Female White 50-59 Male White 60+ Female White 60+ Male Latino 0-17 Female Latino 0-17 Male Latino 18-24 Female Latino 18-24 Male Latino 25-29 Female Latino 25-29 Male Latino 30-39 Female Latino 30-39 Male Latino 40-49 Female Latino 40-49 Male Latino 50-59 Female Latino 50-59 Male Latino 60+ Female Latino 60+ Male African American 0-17 Female African American 0-17 Male African American 18-24 Female African American 18-24 Male African American 25-29 Female 1980 1,532 6,206 4,362 26,913 2,811 15,736 1,809 10,181 1,269 6,694 643 4,324 167 1,591 1,074 5,964 3,748 39,554 2,674 28,101 1,986 19,588 1,221 14,088 704 10,254 231 4,211 2,465 12,498 12,319 59,795 9,718 1990 1,114 3,557 6,469 28,181 5,817 22,025 3,863 14,585 1,693 7,294 735 3,693 196 1,200 941 4,961 4,457 37,532 4,464 32,017 3,365 24,034 1,763 14,044 703 7,700 243 3,095 2,626 11,339 16,466 68,069 18,559 2000 1,190 3,407 5,292 19,163 3,726 11,835 3,708 10,361 2,138 7,098 638 3,161 108 749 874 3,366 3,444 22,423 2,668 16,294 2,439 12,703 1,642 9,390 614 5,275 133 1,830 2,912 7,653 14,034 47,531 10,399 2010 922 2,097 6,247 15,019 4,858 12,020 3,692 8,910 3,026 7,937 1,210 4,261 175 885 876 2,824 4,471 19,044 4,066 16,517 2,935 11,489 1,928 7,809 862 4,798 162 1,387 2,963 7,385 16,699 40,978 13,094 2016 306 700 3,788 8,335 5,774 13,517 3,999 9,403 2,845 6,689 1,483 4,633 213 940 341 989 2,902 11,638 3,834 14,299 2,806 10,222 1,505 5,994 733 3,832 142 1,171 1,340 3,275 10,762 24,217 12,638 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 32 Group 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 African American 25-29 Male 54,954 60,436 34,595 38,303 33,733 African American 30-39 Female 5,125 14,219 10,142 9,119 8,683 African American 30-39 Male 40,198 54,440 29,742 28,460 26,515 African American 40-49 Female 2,312 5,349 7,141 6,758 4,773 African American 40-49 Male 24,061 32,203 27,616 22,361 17,287 African American 50-59 Female 1,164 1,446 1,944 3,391 2,901 African American 50-59 Male 16,288 14,066 13,891 16,801 14,538 African American 60+ Female 289 357 248 434 493 African American 60+ Male 6,463 4,960 3,295 3,967 4,213 Other 0-17 Female 682 767 616 422 149 Other 0-17 Male 2,529 3,901 2,005 986 338 Other 18-24 Female 2,358 3,409 1,952 2,430 1,383 Other 18-24 Male 11,685 20,710 8,848 6,811 3,882 Other 25-29 Female 1,765 2,965 1,254 1,877 1,809 Other 25-29 Male 8,768 15,963 5,430 6,155 5,446 Other 30-39 Female 1,288 2,070 1,007 1,149 1,188 Other 30-39 Male 6,396 10,261 4,240 3,939 4,048 Other 40-49 Female 904 1,180 712 800 705 Other 40-49 Male 4,877 5,534 3,077 2,744 2,465 Other 50-59 Female 449 660 329 432 376 Other 50-59 Male 3,463 2,990 1,495 1,587 1,484 Other 60+ Female 175 282 85 109 101 Other 60+ Male 1,339 1,324 529 464 432 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group: PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 33 TABLE D2 Overall Arrest Rates, 2016 Age County 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced 525 476 422 1,139 1,299 294 531 683 938 941 570 712 629 285 680 1,351 1,211 917 469 958 1,099 69 1,129 995 6,416 16,667 5,840 7,846 6,011 12,581 7,163 9,342 5,679 7,792 8,864 7,793 9,720 10,242 11,289 8,954 13,570 5,781 5,995 6,777 8,375 5,837 12,788 7,604 7,462 23,913 14,045 15,885 14,671 16,830 9,094 15,235 10,293 12,212 15,929 16,861 13,744 20,546 16,466 12,242 25,421 8,500 7,926 8,333 9,464 12,606 18,298 11,403 5,307 18,391 12,517 16,016 15,044 15,610 6,116 11,585 9,103 9,765 11,153 12,930 12,975 10,075 12,557 10,937 20,808 6,603 5,012 7,671 6,578 11,489 13,881 9,834 3,654 11,905 6,656 10,519 7,441 7,869 3,537 8,902 4,904 6,593 6,711 10,178 7,748 6,656 8,401 8,342 13,331 4,459 3,084 5,006 3,749 8,676 9,522 5,723 2,558 3,465 4,140 6,710 4,004 5,184 2,072 5,690 3,047 3,959 3,987 5,361 4,470 3,889 5,240 4,866 7,599 2,842 2,201 2,884 2,889 3,790 5,729 3,434 584 1,090 535 1,057 638 1,149 416 1,012 595 784 998 974 961 947 1,182 1,158 1,358 713 511 529 713 524 801 800 Gender Female Male 1,480 2,170 2,505 3,644 2,373 2,970 1,405 3,290 1,813 2,226 2,895 2,916 2,493 2,165 3,080 3,153 4,130 2,585 1,199 1,372 1,497 1,935 3,082 2,025 4,660 9,913 5,387 9,177 6,007 9,176 4,535 7,355 4,904 7,129 6,864 8,813 8,300 6,763 9,147 7,651 11,685 4,080 4,441 5,982 4,611 5,550 9,060 6,891 White 2,373 NA 3,731 6,861 4,033 NA 2,553 6,500 3,455 3,698 5,624 6,086 7,206 NA 6,633 4,416 7,704 3,701 2,046 3,017 2,321 NA 6,297 4,416 Race Latino 3,629 NA African American 9,637 NA 4,397 4,343 4,516 NA 8,816 25,038 16,599 NA 2,698 1,491 3,011 5,064 3,521 3,632 5,093 NA 9,751 2,249 15,152 13,352 37,589 26,834 9,972 NA 4,957 5,998 6,329 2,256 3,006 3,852 4,980 NA 16,279 11,869 25,810 1,818 7,955 7,440 14,786 NA 4,430 4,536 32,514 12,246 Other 977 NA 6,331 3,466 4,550 NA 1,013 6,360 1,875 1,935 5,551 4,825 5,376 NA 5,389 3,396 10,697 6,450 922 2,349 1,545 NA 7,443 1,612 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 34 County Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus PPIC.ORG" Age 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ 604 210 841 836 1,245 557 570 1,220 396 463 1,159 700 648 728 950 777 623 1,516 592 820 775 NA 929 1,287 1,137 820 9,524 9,381 7,323 9,075 6,707 7,184 6,923 8,103 5,112 5,054 6,997 7,995 6,532 6,790 5,674 8,367 9,922 10,213 5,745 6,520 11,406 8,494 12,902 9,673 9,169 7,742 23,138 8,686 9,769 9,843 13,532 9,367 10,003 14,004 6,972 8,049 10,570 12,049 8,429 5,762 8,630 14,002 9,711 12,283 7,176 12,861 20,838 17,117 20,958 13,848 13,733 14,472 14,035 4,380 6,427 8,744 9,583 5,658 6,207 12,686 5,387 5,533 9,615 8,674 5,968 3,268 6,946 11,419 6,008 9,207 4,607 10,709 17,083 14,523 21,602 10,894 9,235 11,400 7,136 2,856 4,181 5,002 5,181 3,181 3,820 11,205 2,934 3,590 4,239 5,094 4,360 3,049 4,095 7,742 3,519 7,524 2,980 6,288 11,235 11,327 12,318 6,023 6,785 7,334 4,063 1,741 2,878 3,168 2,814 2,047 2,532 4,248 1,931 2,351 2,895 3,281 3,209 2,409 2,397 4,721 2,654 6,849 2,109 4,262 5,521 6,262 5,918 3,529 4,161 5,114 386 1,036 607 596 511 367 372 773 374 496 485 658 653 461 514 776 571 2,017 470 932 818 651 1,118 593 780 882 Gender Female Male 2,978 1,046 1,758 1,979 1,783 1,334 1,583 2,922 1,162 1,291 1,793 1,963 1,670 982 1,547 2,406 1,430 2,690 1,142 2,047 3,772 2,758 3,824 2,600 2,401 2,534 6,586 4,425 5,204 5,944 5,283 4,638 4,404 6,391 3,809 4,358 6,074 6,571 4,996 4,182 4,949 7,549 5,236 9,023 3,986 7,056 9,680 6,890 9,926 7,233 6,989 7,916 White NA NA 3,182 3,672 3,650 2,833 2,943 NA 2,346 2,628 2,569 4,175 3,009 2,475 3,870 5,021 2,296 5,918 2,189 4,452 7,056 NA 6,437 4,620 4,263 6,047 Race Latino NA NA African American NA NA 3,650 4,063 2,508 3,862 2,929 NA 10,941 22,175 24,286 11,151 17,121 NA 2,460 2,295 4,785 3,946 3,455 354 2,725 4,994 5,029 5,853 4,627 4,772 3,744 NA 5,578 8,305 16,452 8,961 11,799 19,170 8,323 11,726 21,290 19,176 12,504 22,177 33,135 NA 5,846 4,106 5,101 4,289 25,862 12,106 21,942 16,895 Other NA NA 1,731 1,766 1,647 1,240 1,368 NA 1,025 1,020 1,762 1,814 1,556 1,392 1,277 3,033 1,730 3,006 789 2,169 3,769 NA 9,455 1,536 3,134 2,262 Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 35 Age Gender Race County 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Female Male White Latino African American Sutter 838 8,072 12,617 9,699 6,391 3,905 649 2,424 6,635 5,514 3,889 17,119 Tehama Trinity 1,080 507 10,930 11,538 18,203 28,223 15,636 22,988 8,894 12,287 6,257 3,682 1,149 1,156 3,298 3,292 9,246 9,681 6,755 NA 4,919 NA 38,710 NA Tulare 1,125 10,322 13,404 11,424 7,163 4,185 947 2,535 8,144 5,078 5,322 21,603 Tuolumne 537 11,773 19,489 17,849 10,547 5,050 1,104 4,210 8,288 6,528 5,775 6,667 Ventura 1,042 8,511 11,140 8,235 5,152 2,871 573 1,960 6,108 3,463 4,978 12,345 Yolo 820 3,860 8,474 10,303 6,404 4,451 884 1,949 6,253 4,026 4,029 20,699 Yuba 908 8,576 13,305 10,548 7,503 4,644 928 2,456 7,665 5,924 3,381 16,044 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents of the relevant demographic group. Other 1,949 3,401 NA 3,301 4,374 1,016 1,636 2,479 In California’s largest counties, the age profile of arrest rates generally mirrored that of the state as a whole in 2016, with the highest rates occurring among 25-29 year-olds, and fewer among younger or older age groups. Additionally, rates for the 18-24 and 30-39 year-old ranges were often quite similar. In smaller counties, this pattern frequently varied, often with 30-39 year-olds showing much higher arrest rates than the 18-24 year-olds, and sometimes even posting the highest rates. The gender distribution of arrests in 2016 was somewhat more stable across counties—with few exceptions, large and small counties alike saw a male-tofemale arrest ratio of approximately 3:1. As noted above, the counties with unusually small ratios of female arrestees included urban as well as rural places: Los Angeles, Madera, San Francisco, Alpine, and Mono. By contrast, arrest rates by race/ethnicity vary considerably by county. While African Americans have the highest arrest rates in all but a few small counties, the comparison between Latino and white arrest rates is more complicated. While in the state as a whole, arrest rates among Latinos are 11% higher than those among whites, there are 32 counties where white arrest rates are higher than those for Latinos, and their relative magnitudes exhibit wide variation. The racial groups subsumed under “Other” had the lowest arrest rates for 2016 in most counties, the exceptions generally being rural counties with small populations of those groups—Asians, Pacific Islanders, American Indians, and Alaska Natives among them. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 36 TABLE D3 Felony Arrest Rates, 2016 County Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced 0-17 246 NA 70 239 284 33 166 154 109 242 106 243 156 26 192 382 310 356 210 177 255 35 361 322 18-24 1,832 3,333 1,758 1,313 1,381 3,420 2,687 2,648 1,500 2,194 2,144 1,502 2,989 2,855 2,618 2,481 3,114 2,337 1,858 1,966 1,879 2,502 3,652 1,979 25-29 1,913 4,348 4,551 3,520 4,044 5,811 3,037 3,386 2,784 3,203 4,752 3,772 4,534 6,888 3,469 3,228 6,998 2,411 2,213 2,393 1,849 4,000 5,304 3,073 Age 30-39 1,385 4,598 4,008 3,398 4,176 3,223 2,045 3,029 2,597 2,651 3,320 2,729 4,706 3,409 2,754 2,671 5,777 2,315 1,405 2,237 1,323 3,150 3,466 2,387 Gender Race African 40-49 50-59 60+ Female Male White Latino Other American 876 562 112 326 1,287 486 813 3,297 225 2,381 NA 272 181 2,087 NA NA NA NA 2,226 969 116 721 1,647 1,115 910 3,275 2,989 1,998 1,171 127 566 1,912 1,298 847 6,026 677 2,029 1,023 170 508 1,698 954 1,475 5,668 2,180 1,807 939 113 631 2,272 NA NA NA NA 1,114 562 85 393 1,559 752 871 3,700 314 1,673 961 121 722 1,663 1,440 294 265 1,603 1,291 609 121 395 1,282 846 770 4,722 507 1,482 741 135 422 1,944 843 1,272 4,005 501 1,753 969 209 640 1,978 1,477 978 12,057 1,388 1,634 634 104 464 1,753 1,090 816 5,451 1,133 2,846 1,315 261 670 2,923 2,315 1,714 3,366 1,584 2,166 800 210 541 2,102 NA NA NA NA 1,496 689 123 482 2,005 1,263 1,114 3,755 411 1,911 882 225 641 2,008 931 1,480 3,804 996 3,106 1,382 216 856 2,971 1,674 1,869 6,968 3,404 1,567 835 189 772 1,442 1,303 654 839 1,626 753 472 94 283 1,285 479 827 2,591 241 1,280 771 116 319 1,691 909 968 2,787 583 624 379 70 248 873 366 877 4,483 288 2,140 745 154 447 1,678 NA NA NA NA 2,152 1,154 129 641 2,418 1,539 1,130 8,129 2,216 1,215 660 123 376 1,807 1,088 1,065 3,557 471 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 37 County Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus PPIC.ORG" 0-17 165 35 220 257 346 171 173 344 133 204 233 311 170 362 292 160 166 292 207 252 159 NA 195 335 226 330 18-24 3,139 2,887 1,846 2,300 1,533 1,670 1,870 2,161 1,698 2,046 2,021 2,655 1,545 2,769 1,759 1,132 1,995 1,668 1,549 1,454 3,007 5,019 4,411 2,520 1,940 2,344 25-29 7,447 2,227 2,426 2,054 2,868 2,087 2,906 2,959 2,311 3,101 3,004 3,797 2,053 2,052 2,485 2,209 1,508 2,587 1,848 2,677 5,870 12,613 6,986 3,584 2,583 4,390 Age 30-39 5,482 1,597 1,620 2,227 2,297 1,295 1,879 2,740 1,842 2,099 2,993 2,812 1,535 1,250 1,988 2,032 1,133 1,930 1,222 2,197 4,752 5,809 7,496 2,807 1,828 3,692 Gender Race 40-49 50-59 60+ Female Male White Latino African American Other 2,218 903 161 881 2,280 NA NA NA NA 784 261 214 338 1,206 NA NA NA NA 914 509 70 316 1,319 599 919 3,000 423 1,149 520 113 400 1,448 894 832 6,649 350 1,123 520 77 326 1,233 789 630 6,000 439 662 348 57 266 1,058 550 924 3,170 266 1,048 461 59 385 1,236 770 2,264 809 152 562 1,467 NA 739 NA 6,663 NA 366 NA 873 494 72 313 1,268 674 805 2,081 303 1,233 700 127 389 1,699 834 817 3,718 387 1,040 662 112 447 1,713 737 1,284 4,194 671 1,486 769 140 533 2,141 1,234 1,201 3,320 519 986 634 112 323 1,243 651 811 3,310 381 1,131 793 145 294 1,650 934 42 8,303 412 1,024 534 110 374 1,440 962 745 2,892 372 1,160 476 93 304 1,180 723 790 2,022 495 556 326 68 216 941 335 816 4,925 332 1,183 768 97 397 1,535 822 1,104 4,163 341 703 418 87 263 1,040 477 1,228 3,541 211 1,068 504 117 316 1,442 772 1,072 4,793 335 2,397 4,854 984 3,416 148 244 691 1475 2,657 3,413 1,708 NA 926 NA 11,221 NA 1,047 NA 3,790 1,415 170 938 3,327 1,889 2,171 9,962 3,118 1,391 690 89 513 1,902 1,017 878 3,520 384 1,122 501 79 339 1,345 745 864 5,053 675 2,010 1,174 154 612 2,478 1,674 1,308 5,995 696 Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 38 County Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yolo Yuba 0-17 294 188 231 313 126 240 333 354 18-24 2,356 3,032 3,590 3,097 3,127 1,943 1,016 3,193 25-29 3,950 5,579 12,544 3,945 5,487 2,455 2,233 4,754 Age 30-39 3,222 4,611 10,290 3,448 5,489 1,827 2,858 4,020 Gender Race 40-49 50-59 60+ Female Male White Latino African American Other 1,651 908 118 633 2,034 1,524 1,183 6,836 586 2,047 6,218 1,102 813 241 426 730 1426 2,519 3,928 1,753 NA 1,174 NA 13,620 NA 997 NA 1,867 1,014 181 600 2,434 1,439 1,495 6,802 1,009 2,745 1,167 209 1057 2,327 1,717 1,803 2,828 1,129 974 440 81 346 1,340 615 1,108 3,615 245 1,467 866 112 407 1,688 970 1,061 6,150 374 2,798 1,512 251 746 2,944 2,087 1,319 7,146 756 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents of the relevant demographic group. County-by-county comparisons of felony arrest rates mirror those of overall arrest rates—larger counties typically show 25-29 year-olds with the highest rates, with 18-24 and 30-39 year-olds somewhat lower, and similar to each other. Smaller counties more frequently have 30-39 year-olds with comparatively higher arrest rates, sometimes occupying the top spot among age groups. The male-to-female ratio of felony arrests in 2016 was lower than for all arrests—approximately 4:1—but again was fairly consistent across counties. Latino felony arrest rates, overall higher than those for whites, are nonetheless lower than for whites in 28 of the 58 counties. The “Other” racial grouping posts rather high arrest rates in some, mostly smaller, counties— sometimes even eclipsing those for African Americans, who show the highest overall felony arrest rates. However, this figure is subject to much variation there because of small general populations of the constituent racial groups. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 39 TABLE D4 Misdemeanor Arrest Rates, 2016 Age County 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced 279 476 352 899 1,014 261 365 529 829 700 464 469 472 259 488 969 901 561 259 781 844 35 768 673 4,583 13,333 4,082 6,533 4,629 9,161 4,476 6,694 4,179 5,598 6,720 6,291 6,731 7,387 8,671 6,473 10,456 3,444 4,137 4,811 6,496 3,335 9,136 5,625 5,549 19,565 9,494 12,365 10,627 11,019 6,058 11,850 7,508 9,008 11,177 13,088 9,210 13,658 12,998 9,014 18,423 6,089 5,713 5,939 7,615 8,606 12,993 8,330 3,923 13,793 8,509 12,618 10,868 12,387 4,071 8,556 6,506 7,114 7,833 10,201 8,270 6,667 9,803 8,266 15,031 4,288 3,607 5,435 5,254 8,338 10,415 7,447 2,778 9,524 4,429 8,522 5,412 6,062 2,423 7,229 3,613 5,111 4,958 8,543 4,902 4,490 6,906 6,430 10,226 2,892 2,331 3,725 3,125 6,536 7,370 4,508 1,996 3,465 3,171 5,539 2,981 4,245 1,509 4,729 2,438 3,217 3,018 4,727 3,154 3,090 4,552 3,984 6,217 2,008 1,729 2,114 2,510 3,046 4,574 2,775 60+ 472 817 419 930 468 1,037 331 891 474 650 789 870 700 737 1,059 933 1,142 524 417 413 644 370 671 678 Gender Female Male 1,154 1,989 1,784 3,078 1,864 2,340 1,013 2,568 1,418 1,804 2,255 2,452 1,824 1,624 2,599 2,512 3,275 1,813 916 1,053 1,249 1,488 2,441 1,648 3,373 7,826 3,740 7,265 4,309 6,903 2,976 5,692 3,622 5,184 4,887 7,061 5,377 4,661 7,141 5,642 8,713 2,638 3,155 4,291 3,739 3,872 6,641 5,084 White Latino 1,888 NA 2,615 5,563 3,079 NA 1,800 5,060 2,608 2,855 4,147 4,996 4,892 NA 5,370 3,485 6,030 2,399 1,568 2,108 1,955 NA 4,759 3,328 2,816 NA 3,487 3,496 3,041 NA 1,827 1,197 2,241 3,791 2,544 2,815 3,380 NA 3,843 4,518 4,459 1,602 2,178 2,884 4,103 NA 3,300 3,472 Race African American 6,341 NA 5,542 19,012 10,931 NA 6,050 1,984 10,430 9,347 25,532 21,384 6,606 NA 12,524 8,064 18,842 979 5,364 4,653 10,302 NA 24,386 8,689 Other 751 NA 3,341 2,789 2,370 NA 698 4,757 1,369 1,434 4,163 3,691 3,792 NA 4,977 2,400 7,293 4,824 681 1,765 1,257 NA 5,228 1,141 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 40 County 0-17 Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus 439 175 621 578 899 386 398 876 264 259 926 389 478 366 658 617 457 1,224 385 568 616 NA 734 952 912 490 18-24 6,385 6,495 5,478 6,775 5,174 5,514 5,052 5,942 3,414 3,007 4,977 5,340 4,987 4,020 3,914 7,235 7,927 8,545 4,197 5,066 8,399 3,475 8,491 7,153 7,229 5,398 Age 25-29 30-39 15,691 6,459 7,344 7,789 10,663 7,280 7,097 11,045 4,661 4,948 7,566 8,253 6,376 3,710 6,145 11,793 8,203 9,696 5,328 10,184 14,967 4,505 13,972 10,264 11,150 10,081 8,553 2,783 4,806 6,517 7,287 4,362 4,329 9,946 3,545 3,435 6,622 5,862 4,433 2,018 4,957 9,386 4,875 7,276 3,385 8,512 12,330 8,714 14,106 8,088 7,407 7,708 40-49 4,918 2,072 3,267 3,853 4,057 2,519 2,772 8,942 2,060 2,357 3,200 3,608 3,374 1,919 3,071 6,582 2,963 6,340 2,276 5,220 8,838 6,472 8,528 4,632 5,663 5,324 50-59 3,160 1,480 2,369 2,647 2,293 1,699 2,071 3,439 1,437 1,651 2,232 2,512 2,575 1,617 1,863 4,245 2,329 6,081 1,691 3,758 4,537 2,846 4,503 2,839 3,660 3,940 PPIC.ORG" 60+ 225 822 537 483 434 310 313 621 302 369 373 518 542 316 404 683 503 1,920 382 815 669 407 947 504 701 728 Gender Female Male 2,097 707 1,442 1,578 1,456 1,068 1,199 2,360 848 902 1,346 1,430 1,347 688 1,173 2,102 1,215 2,293 879 1,731 3,081 1,283 2,886 2,086 2,061 1,922 4,307 3,220 3,884 4,496 4,049 3,580 3,168 4,924 2,541 2,659 4,361 4,429 3,753 2,532 3,509 6,369 4,295 7,488 2,946 5,614 7,023 3,477 6,599 5,331 5,644 5,438 White Latino NA NA 2,583 2,778 2,861 2,283 2,173 NA 1,672 1,793 1,832 2,942 2,358 1,540 2,908 4,298 1,961 5,096 1,712 3,680 5,348 NA 4,548 3,603 3,519 4,373 NA NA 2,730 3,231 1,879 2,937 2,190 NA 1,655 1,479 3,500 2,745 2,644 312 1,980 4,204 4,213 4,749 3,399 3,700 2,818 NA 3,675 3,228 4,237 2,981 Race African American NA NA 7,941 15,527 18,286 7,981 10,458 NA 3,497 4,587 12,258 5,641 8,489 10,867 5,431 9,705 16,365 15,013 8,963 17,384 21,914 NA 15,900 8,586 16,889 10,900 Other NA NA 1,308 1,416 1,207 974 1,001 NA 722 632 1,091 1,295 1,176 980 905 2,538 1,398 2,665 578 1,834 2,722 NA 6,337 1,152 2,459 1,566 Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 41 County Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yolo Yuba 0-17 544 893 277 811 412 802 487 554 Age 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 5,716 7,898 7,949 7,225 8,646 6,568 2,845 5,383 8,668 12,624 15,679 9,459 14,002 8,685 6,241 8,550 6,477 11,024 12,697 7,976 12,360 6,408 7,445 6,527 4,739 6,847 6,070 5,296 7,802 4,178 4,938 4,705 2,997 5,155 2,869 3,171 3,882 2,431 3,584 3,132 Gender Race 60+ Female Male White Latino African American 532 1,791 4,600 3,990 2,706 10,282 908 2,568 6,727 5,002 3,744 730 1,866 5,754 NA NA 25,090 NA 766 1,935 5,710 3,639 3,826 14,801 895 3,153 5,960 4,811 3,972 3,838 492 1,614 4,768 2,847 3,870 8,730 772 1,542 4,565 3,056 2,968 14,548 677 1,710 4,722 3,836 2,062 8,898 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents of the relevant demographic group. Other 1,363 2,404 NA 2,292 3,245 771 1,262 1,723 Overall, 25-29 year-olds have the highest misdemeanor arrest rates, with 6,991 per 100,000 in the population. Second and third are 18-24 year-olds and 30-39 year-olds, respectively. County by county, the pattern is similar to that of felony arrests: larger counties tend to follow that same ranking, while smaller counties often show higher misdemeanor arrest rates among 30-39 year-olds, occasionally even higher than the 25-29 year-olds. Gender ratios for misdemeanor arrests also follow a familiar pattern: larger counties consistently report a male-to-female ratio of about 3:1, with smaller counties clustering around that same figure, albeit with a bit more variation on either side. Similarly, the race/ethnic breakdown generally adheres to the statewide pattern, with the highest misdemeanor arrest rates seen among African-Americans (especially high in more rural counties with fewer African-Americans in the general population), Latinos and whites variously posting the second- or third-highest rates, and “Other” races usually showing the lowest rates (except in small counties with low populations of those constituent minority groups). PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 42 TABLE D5 Shares of Arrest Types by Demographic Groups, 2016 Total Offense Level County Overall Felony Misdemeanor White Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced 25% 17% 29% 29% 28% 24% 24% 28% 27% 24% 29% 25% 23% 24% 24% 26% 26% 28% 22% 20% 25% 25% 25% 22% 21% 8% 27% 23% 23% 21% 21% 27% 23% 18% 24% 21% 18% 20% 19% 21% 22% 24% 18% 17% 23% 21% 21% 17% 26% 20% 29% 30% 30% 24% 26% 28% 28% 26% 31% 26% 25% 25% 26% 27% 27% 29% 23% 21% 26% 27% 27% 24% 20% 54% 72% 76% 71% 43% 35% 76% 78% 21% 60% 74% 14% 53% 35% 22% 62% 78% 17% 32% 47% 73% 66% 28% Felony Arrest Shares Latino 24% African American 47% 8% NA 11% 6% 11% 7% 16% 3% 46% 3% 23% 35% 4% 1% 13% 4% 57% 16% 31% 4% 8% 5% 80% 4% 14% 0% 46% 16% 60% 14% 20% 6% 9% 5% 52% 27% 58% 8% 27% 22% 14% 2% 19% 3% 57% 11% Other 9% 38% 11% 5% 9% 8% 7% 19% 5% 5% 5% 12% 2% 33% 2% 5% 12% 9% 5% 3% 5% 11% 12% 4% Misdemeanor Arrest Shares White 28% Latino 29% African American 32% Other 11% 77% 9% 4% 11% 73% 17% 4% 5% 78% 11% 5% 5% 82% 12% 2% 4% 43% 48% 4% 5% 41% 24% 28% 7% 78% 5% 1% 16% 80% 12% 3% 4% 24% 58% 13% 5% 62% 29% 3% 5% 79% 7% 5% 9% 15% 79% 4% 2% 51% 15% 1% 33% 39% 41% 14% 7% 27% 60% 10% 4% 72% 15% 5% 8% 73% 11% 3% 13% 21% 52% 21% 6% 28% 64% 5% 3% 56% 28% 11% 5% 79% 14% 2% 5% 69% 18% 3% 10% 28% 60% 9% 3% PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 43 County Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus PPIC.ORG" Total Offense Level Overall Felony Misdemeanor White 31% 17% 24% 25% 26% 23% 27% 31% 24% 23% 23% 23% 25% 19% 24% 23% 22% 23% 22% 22% 29% 28% 28% 27% 26% 25% 28% 20% 18% 22% 21% 20% 24% 28% 20% 19% 21% 20% 20% 15% 21% 20% 19% 20% 20% 18% 21% 30% 22% 21% 21% 20% 33% 16% 26% 26% 27% 23% 28% 32% 25% 26% 24% 25% 26% 21% 25% 24% 23% 23% 23% 24% 31% 27% 31% 28% 27% 26% 68% 54% 22% 51% 86% 35% 72% 83% 32% 37% 24% 27% 38% 40% 35% 66% 24% 38% 24% 50% 83% 84% 69% 32% 57% 46% Felony Arrest Shares Latino African American 13% 1% 29% 4% 64% 9% 32% 13% 8% 3% 49% 7% 13% 11% 3% 4% 48% 16% 18% 37% 71% 2% 48% 22% 35% 19% 1% 43% 34% 24% 24% 5% 37% 21% 53% 7% 51% 13% 42% 5% 5% 6% 10% NA 12% 6% 19% 42% 28% 9% 39% 11% Other 18% 14% 4% 4% 3% 9% 5% 10% 3% 8% 3% 4% 7% 16% 8% 4% 18% 3% 12% 3% 6% 5% 13% 7% 6% 4% Misdemeanor Arrest Shares White Latino African American Other 69% 9% 2% 21% 65% 22% 2% 10% 30% 59% 8% 4% 48% 38% 9% 5% 89% 7% 2% 2% 41% 44% 5% 9% 75% 14% 6% 5% 90% 2% 2% 6% 37% 46% 13% 4% 46% 20% 27% 7% 23% 73% 2% 2% 29% 50% 17% 4% 43% 35% 15% 7% 40% 3% 34% 23% 40% 35% 17% 7% 69% 23% 5% 3% 29% 40% 15% 16% 46% 45% 5% 4% 30% 48% 11% 11% 57% 35% 4% 4% 86% 5% 4% 5% 81% 5% 1% 12% 75% 9% 4% 12% 37% 23% 33% 7% 59% 30% 6% 5% 51% 37% 8% 4% Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 44 County Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yolo Yuba Total Offense Level Overall Felony Misdemeanor White 27% 27% 25% 24% 32% 24% 25% 24% 24% 23% 26% 20% 30% 21% 20% 20% 28% 28% 24% 25% 33% 25% 26% 26% 54% 75% 79% 27% 81% 33% 44% 64% Felony Arrest Shares Latino African American 28% 9% 18% 4% 8% 2% 64% 5% 13% 3% 57% 7% 35% 15% 20% 11% SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 2016. Other 8% 3% 11% 3% 3% 3% 6% 5% Misdemeanor Arrest Shares White Latino African American Other 59% 27% 6% 8% 74% 20% 2% 3% 89% 4% 1% 6% 27% 65% 5% 3% 84% 10% 2% 4% 41% 52% 4% 2% 48% 33% 12% 7% 68% 18% 8% 7% Table D5 encapsulates some of the trends summarized above, except that the results are not normalized by the underlying population distribution. For example, we observe higher arrest shares of African Americans in counties with higher-than-average underlying populations of African Americans, e.g., Alameda, Solano, and Sacramento. However, these shares are still disproportionate to the underlying population. Furthermore, we also witness high shares in counties with lower-than-average underlying populations of African Americans, for instance, San Francisco, Yolo, and Marin. The Latino shares of arrests also track with counties’ Latino populations, with the highest shares being found in counties such as Imperial, San Benito, and the counties of the San Joaquin Valley. Again, though, these percentages are disproportionate to the underlying population shares. These disparities hold for felony as well as misdemeanor arrest shares. Since gender distributions vary less by county than do race/ethnicity distributions, we see less variation in the gender shares of arrests. What variation does appear might suggest more about each county’s conditions (crime rates, law enforcement staffing, policing practices, political priorities) than about its underlying population. Generally, the female share of arrests hovers around 25%, and generally, it’s slightly higher for misdemeanors than for felonies. But some exceptions emerge, for instance, women make up about 1/3 of all arrests in the three counties with the highest female shares of arrests: Tuolumne (32 percent), Plumas (31 percent), and Modoc (31 percent). However, we also see some small counties among those with the lowest arrest shares for women; Alpine (17 percent), Mono (17 percent), San Francisco (19 percent), and Madera (20 percent). It should be noted that the pattern that the highest female shares of arrests tend to be small rural counties holds for both felony arrests and misdemeanors. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 45 Appendix E. Data and Methods Data Arrest Data The California Department of Justice (CA DOJ) Criminal Justice Statistics Center (CJSC) collects information on arrests and citations. This arrest and citation data is reported monthly by law enforcement agencies (LEAs) throughout the state and put together into the Monthly Arrest and Citation Register (MACR) dataset. The CA DOJ has statutory authority to collect arrest data pursuant to Penal Code Sections 13010-13012 and 13020-13021. Arrest data provide information on felony and misdemeanor level arrests, along with status offenses (e.g., truancy, incorrigibility, running away, and curfew violations) for juveniles. Arrest data include individual-level information on the nature of the arrest such as the date it occurred and which county it occurred within, along with the most serious offense the suspect was arrested for, and the final outcome of the arrest. The data also contain person-level information on the arrestee including his or her name, age, gender, and race/ethnic group. The data used for this report are confidential and PPIC is unable to share this data outside of its research team. However, the CA DOJ has created the OpenJustice website (https://openjustice.doj.ca.gov/) to make available a wide range of criminal justice data. The website contains publicly available data, data manuals, and annual reports conducted by the CA DOJ. Population Data The California Department of Finance (CA DOF), Demographics and Research Unit, is tasked with publishing the state’s official annual population estimates at the state, county and city levels. These estimates are benchmarked on the decennial census’ population statistics, and then utilize a variety of state administrative sources to estimate changes during the intercensal years. For the years 1980-2010, we make use of the E-7 Annual Intercensal Population Estimates by Race/Ethnicity with Age and Gender Detail estimate tables, available for download on the DOF website (http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/). For the years 2011-2016, we utilize DOF’s demographic projections from the P-3 State and County Projections Dataset (http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Projections/). In their standard formats, these datasets contain the year of observation, the long form of the county of observation’s geographically identifying FIPS code, and the number of people within a county by gender, race/ethnicity, and age. The available race/ethnicity categories available for all years of the data are White, African American, American Indian, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Hispanic. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 46 TABLE E1 1980-2016 State Population Overall, by Gender, by Age, and Race/Ethnicity Year 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total Gender Age Race Total Female Male 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ White Latino African American Other 23,780,068 24,277,674 24,805,011 25,336,301 25,816,294 26,402,633 27,052,291 27,716,860 28,393,094 29,142,106 29,828,238 30,458,186 30,987,427 31,313,074 31,523,075 31,711,003 31,962,164 32,451,807 32,862,213 33,418,384 34,000,835 34,512,742 34,938,290 35,388,928 35,752,765 35,985,582 36,246,822 36,552,529 36,856,222 12,057,299 12,284,160 12,529,398 12,776,467 12,997,526 13,271,959 13,578,094 13,891,742 14,211,394 14,568,118 14,927,384 15,246,102 15,515,174 15,683,178 15,794,686 15,895,710 16,028,140 16,280,567 16,494,716 16,774,907 17,079,605 17,339,700 17,554,666 17,782,868 17,968,347 18,087,299 18,219,378 18,372,905 18,525,551 11,722,769 11,993,514 12,275,613 12,559,834 12,818,768 13,130,674 13,474,197 13,825,118 14,181,700 14,573,988 14,900,854 15,212,084 15,472,253 15,629,896 15,728,389 15,815,293 15,934,024 16,171,240 16,367,497 16,643,477 16,921,230 17,173,042 17,383,624 17,606,060 17,784,418 17,898,283 18,027,444 18,179,624 18,330,671 6,430,341 6,592,378 6,725,511 6,856,643 6,969,874 7,117,459 7,283,296 7,426,616 7,549,923 7,677,877 7,962,679 8,296,128 8,592,252 8,778,558 8,907,166 8,993,180 9,067,742 9,175,041 9,203,676 9,243,483 9,226,715 9,351,040 9,439,641 9,522,125 9,559,942 9,551,284 9,550,173 9,549,093 9,525,912 3,269,218 3,321,549 3,367,303 3,405,287 3,430,320 3,439,613 3,425,434 3,461,716 3,482,135 3,512,200 3,472,993 3,418,466 3,373,866 3,334,926 3,286,864 3,223,197 3,191,883 3,227,975 3,287,125 3,355,265 3,403,068 3,480,653 3,547,272 3,630,339 3,704,139 3,750,160 3,777,042 3,812,497 3,843,861 2,244,431 2,303,765 2,383,900 2,442,840 2,493,891 2,556,257 2,636,108 2,690,961 2,763,505 2,838,290 2,837,441 2,784,777 2,737,839 2,669,016 2,612,055 2,590,150 2,596,454 2,613,088 2,620,681 2,606,037 2,582,530 2,536,097 2,509,602 2,506,589 2,517,332 2,530,079 2,568,339 2,618,394 2,672,698 3,579,339 3,745,958 3,904,765 4,054,736 4,207,905 4,395,464 4,613,723 4,762,914 4,930,017 5,124,519 5,300,083 5,415,152 5,493,693 5,525,546 5,526,757 5,503,157 5,470,351 5,470,450 5,459,962 5,488,555 5,544,515 5,547,256 5,504,832 5,453,867 5,381,900 5,301,469 5,253,382 5,231,468 5,223,989 2,437,202 2,470,933 2,533,456 2,635,208 2,736,466 2,846,102 2,959,572 3,153,096 3,345,685 3,538,297 3,746,241 3,915,926 4,061,431 4,178,176 4,288,988 4,417,608 4,549,788 4,650,213 4,751,804 4,872,116 5,019,549 5,140,349 5,244,640 5,334,166 5,401,896 5,430,150 5,433,066 5,420,042 5,399,525 2,405,603 2,379,154 2,341,796 2,315,387 2,282,492 2,270,019 2,270,857 2,282,563 2,306,864 2,354,155 2,394,736 2,440,791 2,497,553 2,572,229 2,639,481 2,703,789 2,780,788 2,950,133 3,111,476 3,279,088 3,499,221 3,651,614 3,794,609 3,932,849 4,071,512 4,209,375 4,344,213 4,463,785 4,554,904 3,413,934 3,463,937 3,548,280 3,626,200 3,695,346 3,777,719 3,863,301 3,938,994 4,014,965 4,096,768 4,114,065 4,186,946 4,230,793 4,254,623 4,261,764 4,279,922 4,305,158 4,364,907 4,427,489 4,573,840 4,725,236 4,805,733 4,897,695 5,008,993 5,116,044 5,213,066 5,320,607 5,457,250 5,635,333 15,949,865 15,988,809 16,039,332 16,092,416 16,118,779 16,216,876 16,351,870 16,504,967 16,674,150 16,886,542 17,023,540 17,058,054 17,017,989 16,872,297 16,662,922 16,451,132 16,273,751 16,218,350 16,115,115 16,083,291 15,869,494 15,873,181 15,866,488 15,854,432 15,814,212 15,716,066 15,625,359 15,556,795 15,487,390 4,615,231 4,905,823 5,206,814 5,508,671 5,795,931 6,103,662 6,428,436 6,754,398 7,077,579 7,419,574 7,760,408 8,144,055 8,510,544 8,812,620 9,084,479 9,345,976 9,619,410 9,963,894 10,287,317 10,660,337 11,131,841 11,481,484 11,787,393 12,116,017 12,413,958 12,667,790 12,923,558 13,185,607 13,443,156 1,793,663 1,815,312 1,843,132 1,870,686 1,893,386 1,923,209 1,958,844 1,992,361 2,024,779 2,061,823 2,106,034 2,142,583 2,173,357 2,188,642 2,197,114 2,201,855 2,212,935 2,241,770 2,266,640 2,302,375 2,195,808 2,210,103 2,218,543 2,225,966 2,227,246 2,220,269 2,216,691 2,216,181 2,217,102 1,421,309 1,567,730 1,715,733 1,864,528 2,008,198 2,158,886 2,313,141 2,465,134 2,616,586 2,774,167 2,938,256 3,113,494 3,285,537 3,439,515 3,578,560 3,712,040 3,856,068 4,027,793 4,193,141 4,372,381 4,803,691 4,947,973 5,065,866 5,192,513 5,297,349 5,381,456 5,481,214 5,593,946 5,708,574 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 47 Total Gender Age Race Year Total Female Male 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ White Latino African American Other 2009 37,077,204 18,632,980 18,444,224 9,307,822 3,878,334 2,725,038 5,163,197 5,328,628 2010 37,335,085 18,775,428 18,559,657 9,283,438 3,928,347 2,744,738 5,150,208 5,299,045 2011 37,675,500 18,941,910 18,733,590 9,281,575 3,984,075 2,711,916 5,159,273 5,290,881 2012 38,042,760 19,126,608 18,916,152 9,283,191 4,040,538 2,663,566 5,205,998 5,273,176 2013 38,373,749 19,289,906 19,083,843 9,282,818 4,096,477 2,605,330 5,261,870 5,236,169 2014 38,739,792 19,467,456 19,272,336 9,272,748 4,166,987 2,555,931 5,318,812 5,202,887 2015 39,059,415 19,626,015 19,433,400 9,263,507 4,204,875 2,521,019 5,346,222 5,179,027 2016 39,312,207 19,749,757 19,562,450 9,257,380 4,223,279 2,525,971 5,352,282 5,158,070 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016 . 4,710,736 4,791,771 4,892,470 4,982,072 5,053,693 5,116,219 5,148,581 5,136,348 5,963,449 6,137,538 6,355,310 6,594,219 6,837,392 7,106,208 7,396,184 7,658,877 15,251,448 15,046,338 15,031,386 15,036,764 15,021,846 15,030,890 15,017,676 14,977,798 13,792,550 14,059,187 14,311,416 14,562,186 14,795,885 15,032,537 15,254,730 15,455,506 2,205,579 2,187,491 2,197,337 2,207,132 2,218,247 2,232,359 2,239,134 2,242,413 5,827,627 6,042,069 6,135,361 6,236,678 6,337,771 6,444,006 6,547,875 6,636,490 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 48 TABLE E2 2016 County Population Overall, by Gender, by Age, and Race/Ethnicity Overall Gender Age County Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Population 1,637,176 1,128 37,181 224,761 44,747 22,428 Female 832,826 553 17,207 113,058 22,422 10,941 Male 804,350 575 19,974 111,703 22,325 11,487 0-17 349,269 210 5,689 46,365 7,393 6,130 18-24 25-29 30-39 166,950 90 3,185 35,037 4,126 2,456 114,916 46 1,780 14,945 1,929 1,325 243,078 87 3,643 25,044 3,616 2,761 40-49 228,534 126 4,312 23,376 4,287 2,656 50-59 218,411 202 5,677 24,844 6,943 2,662 60+ 316,018 367 12,895 55,150 16,453 4,438 White 542,669 840 29,405 163,216 36,898 8,151 Race Latino 379,834 52 5,276 African American 186,639 794 36,818 5,492 13,560 3,319 247 110 Other 528,034 236 1,706 21,408 2,110 607 Contra Costa 1,129,332 577,313 552,019 252,258 95,089 65,371 149,787 153,597 165,625 247,605 508,511 291,222 102,671 226,928 Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced Modoc Mono Monterey Napa 26,956 184,085 988,072 29,084 135,884 186,520 18,658 887,922 149,172 64,712 30,599 10,215,103 155,518 262,706 18,057 88,779 272,286 9,506 13,801 439,945 141,569 12,463 91,654 494,284 14,370 67,704 91,855 9,239 432,709 67,753 32,371 11,530 5,169,749 80,241 133,112 8,940 44,285 134,985 4,769 6,502 213,995 70,912 14,493 92,431 493,788 14,714 68,180 94,665 9,419 455,213 81,419 32,341 19,069 5,045,354 75,277 129,594 9,117 44,494 137,301 4,737 7,299 225,950 70,657 5,857 36,677 280,673 7,543 27,946 54,402 3,865 255,253 45,526 13,538 5,343 2,319,464 42,402 52,858 2,886 19,134 80,372 1,821 2,859 115,112 29,907 2,644 18,067 124,156 3,125 16,707 21,214 1,611 107,906 17,411 5,652 3,252 1,120,426 17,190 17,719 1,559 7,476 34,915 924 970 48,488 13,565 1,595 9,230 65,494 1,852 8,244 13,322 842 62,588 12,114 3,501 2,447 668,016 11,197 10,979 825 4,864 17,863 376 898 28,406 8,910 3,401 17,829 130,957 3,434 18,066 23,121 1,995 120,056 22,127 6,786 4,104 1,439,155 20,075 25,617 1,619 10,792 35,896 912 2,192 61,896 17,693 2,988 20,839 112,623 3,308 14,807 21,399 1,893 103,553 15,800 6,826 4,149 1,412,388 18,199 39,101 1,729 10,271 31,611 1,037 1,786 54,921 17,313 3,849 30,392 110,999 3,612 17,347 21,209 2,751 102,248 14,859 9,409 4,433 1,344,187 17,127 40,598 2,955 11,521 30,020 1,329 2,298 50,908 19,793 6,622 51,051 163,170 6,210 32,767 31,853 5,701 136,318 21,335 19,000 6,871 1,911,467 29,328 75,834 6,484 24,721 41,609 3,107 2,798 80,214 34,388 17,570 143,416 295,620 15,577 102,644 20,954 11,778 314,084 48,002 46,054 21,804 2,740,584 53,330 186,696 15,162 58,230 76,829 7,474 9,276 135,711 74,833 4,762 25,440 524,336 12,069 15,310 157,448 4,428 467,231 83,663 13,320 4,743 4,975,042 91,054 44,240 1,839 22,483 160,015 1,441 4,000 255,388 49,867 756 1,419 47,867 141 1,431 3,951 76 48,020 7,465 1,019 2,145 815,775 4,449 7,115 111 529 9,138 69 11 11,233 2,602 3,868 13,810 120,249 1,297 16,499 4,167 2,376 58,587 10,042 4,319 1,907 1,683,702 6,685 24,655 945 7,537 26,304 522 514 37,613 14,267 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 49 County Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Overall Population 98,300 3,179,122 375,805 19,535 2,359,588 1,503,536 58,010 2,143,578 3,295,816 872,463 738,343 278,080 768,507 447,309 1,932,827 275,754 177,631 3,141 44,373 433,412 503,152 543,592 98,208 64,158 13,492 467,960 54,291 Gender Female Male 0-17 49,649 1,602,227 191,381 9,787 1,185,845 765,227 29,051 48,651 1,576,895 184,424 9,748 1,173,743 738,309 28,959 1,078,446 1,065,132 1,639,394 1,656,422 16,468 730,547 78,193 3,197 601,433 361,947 14,580 580,699 790,021 430,647 441,816 126,208 369,778 368,565 200,036 135,915 142,165 51,859 389,691 378,816 161,878 221,860 225,449 103,069 958,238 137,835 90,433 1,559 22,280 217,615 255,502 274,078 49,298 32,318 6,592 233,615 26,105 974,589 137,919 87,198 1,582 22,093 215,797 247,650 269,514 48,910 31,840 6,900 234,345 28,186 446,411 60,233 37,816 465 8,719 100,543 99,716 145,153 25,173 15,456 2,169 144,319 8,748 Age 18-24 25-29 30-39 8,871 338,460 30,581 1,666 260,072 169,221 6,631 250,211 359,098 4,567 185,693 20,134 1,014 157,488 91,514 3,595 146,549 221,520 9,579 409,743 48,813 1,679 291,744 208,115 6,916 284,444 455,372 65,142 65,399 185,138 82,467 49,338 92,836 36,571 17,697 30,704 55,783 45,884 107,026 63,862 29,570 57,654 173,761 38,653 16,597 259 3,922 44,608 46,603 66,304 10,270 6,432 1,170 49,661 4,765 114,318 15,426 10,817 111 2,233 27,485 27,875 33,825 6,507 3,818 574 32,066 3,171 288,409 31,721 20,559 241 4,282 54,689 66,074 70,262 12,568 7,048 1,205 63,378 5,793 40-49 10,327 447,102 48,271 1,767 295,593 193,081 7,407 268,499 415,383 132,186 91,774 28,713 115,468 50,454 282,807 32,127 18,986 309 4,327 53,109 60,251 65,364 11,689 6,937 1,351 54,529 5,537 50-59 14,608 440,830 52,969 2,966 296,636 195,635 8,153 268,280 418,833 109,866 94,321 36,982 110,530 54,036 262,372 36,885 24,905 527 6,218 60,867 72,081 66,683 12,445 8,710 2,091 50,614 7,624 60+ 33,880 626,747 96,844 7,246 456,622 284,023 10,728 344,896 635,589 White 83,388 1,333,112 280,911 16,438 885,034 686,814 20,747 Race Latino African American 10,007 350 1,106,884 48,704 51,698 4,953 1,870 151 1,118,643 143,943 351,365 153,640 34,569 310 626,143 1,131,542 186,915 1,527,127 1,124,549 149,376 Other 4,555 690,422 38,243 1,076 211,968 311,717 2,384 198,978 494,764 188,524 366,988 131,924 44,767 328,784 127,571 240,356 305,730 54,945 137,312 75,554 192,142 63,898 5,688 16,352 171,938 315,080 199,476 19,169 234,782 88,664 198,666 208,072 7,134 33,437 364,749 60,709 47,951 1,229 14,672 92,111 130,552 96,001 19,556 15,757 4,932 73,393 18,653 641,453 158,115 143,472 2,813 34,518 166,792 323,689 231,716 46,388 44,204 11,246 134,776 43,920 528,556 94,895 17,069 237 5,388 113,892 134,058 249,808 31,116 16,264 1,190 303,803 6,546 44,985 2,462 1,515 3 522 61,854 7,342 14,679 1,770 279 47 5,601 990 717,833 20,282 15,575 88 3,945 90,874 38,063 47,389 18,934 3,411 1,009 23,780 2,835 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 50 Overall Gender Age County Population Female Male 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 Ventura 853,673 428,739 424,934 200,204 88,126 53,574 105,963 Yolo 216,726 111,126 105,600 49,888 43,521 15,223 24,216 Yuba 76,138 37,784 38,354 21,480 8,081 5,111 10,372 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. 40-49 108,740 23,796 8,757 50-59 120,731 23,547 9,195 60+ 176,335 36,535 13,142 White 390,465 102,515 43,452 Race Latino African American 368,074 13,666 73,013 5,382 20,997 2,169 Other 81,468 35,816 9,520 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 51 Methods Data Standardization Because the variable coding schemes change periodically, we first standardized the codes across years. We began by collapsing the race variable into fewer and larger demographic groups to streamline the analysis. The new race/ethnic groups are White, Latino, African American, and Other. Next, we sorted the age variable into age ranges with the cut points set according to an age group’s frequency in the data. Our age groups are 0-17 (juveniles), 18-24, 25-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, and 60 or over. Additionally, for convenience, we disaggregated offenses coded as “Other Felonies” and “Other Misdemeanors” and create labeled string variables for the gender, offense level, summary offense, type of status, and county variables. Finally, to avoid small sample sizes in the analysis, we created our own aggregated version of the summary offense variable. Our variable comprises violent felonies (Felony-Violent), property felonies (Felony-Property), drug felonies (Felony-Drugs), weapons felonies (Felony-Weapons), warrant felonies (Felony-Warrant), supervision felonies (Felony-Supervision), other felonies (Felony-Other), misdemeanor assault (MisdemeanorAssault/Battery), drug misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-Drugs), alcohol misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-Alcohol), traffic misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-Traffic), property misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-Property), failure to appear or warrant misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-FTA/Warrant), other misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-Other), and status offenses. Arrest Offense Categories Our arrest groups are each composed of several offenses, labeled according to the California Codes. Here we define and elaborate on what some of the more common offense codes entail. The most common offense types for the Felony – Drug category were Narcotics, Dangerous Drugs, and Marijuana. Narcotics are classified as controlled substances having the highest potential for abuse, while Dangerous Drugs are classified as one tier lower. Any offense involving narcotics is a felony, while sale or manufacture of dangerous drugs is a felony, but possession is a misdemeanor. A marijuana offense is a felony in California in the most extreme cases, such as sale to a minor or illegal cultivation for sale. The Felony – Property and Felony – Violent categories are largely intuitive except we will note that Theft rises from a misdemeanor to a felony when the total value of stolen goods exceeds $950, and that Lewd or Lascivious typically refers to the sexual abuse of a minor. Among the Felony – Other category, Driving Under the Influence is typically a misdemeanor but may rise to a felony when one has been repeatedly arrested for this offense, or if someone is seriously injured or killed in the course of a DUI. Additionally, Malicious Mischief entails the destruction or vandalism of another’s property, while Other Felonies refers to a broad range of offenses from violations of the Business and Professions Code to treason. Turning to the misdemeanor offenses, the Misdemeanor – Alcohol category is likely self-evident with the exception of Disturbing the Peace which constitutes a broad range of conduct from inciting a riot to interrupting a session of the Legislature. Misdemeanor – FTA/Warrant offenses refer to those in which an arraigned arrestee did not appear in court as ordered (Failed to Appear), and for those misdemeanors that required a warrant to facilitate the arrest. For Misdemeanor – Drugs, Other Drug Law Violations typically refer to drug related offenses such as illicit possession of syringes, or falsifying a prescription. Misdemeanor Marijuana offenses include acts like smaller scale cultivation without a license or not paying sales taxes on a marijuana transaction. The Misdemeanor PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 52 – Other category is similar to its Felony counterpart, except CI/CO ordinances refer to violations of laws passed by local governments (cities and counties) such as noise ordinances. Lastly, within Misdemeanor – Traffic, Select Traffic refers specifically to Reckless Driving or refusing to comply with a ticket, while Miscellaneous Traffic refers to a long list of other violations of the Vehicle Code. Arrest Rate Calculation We calculated arrest rates for our demographic groups, using our aggregated arrest types at the state and county levels. To do so we first created separate tables at the state and county levels, tallying raw arrest counts by race, age group, gender, and a full disaggregation making use of all three demographic variables. We then merged these arrest counts with California Department of Finance’s demographic and population estimates for the state and its counties. These population data were coded to merge cleanly onto our demographic characteristics. Finally, to calculate arrest rates, we divided the number of persons arrested of a specific demography by the total number of persons of that demography in the state or county, and multiply the quotient by 100,000. We also created separate tables calculating arrest rates by offense level, and identified the five most commonly arrested felonies and misdemeanors for each year of our data. One key difference between our reporting of the data and the annual CJSC Crime in California reports, is the CJSC calculations omit Federal Offenses, Miscellaneous Traffic Offenses, Felony and Misdemeanor Supervision Violations, and Outside of Warrant Misdemeanors and Felonies. We included all offense types in our arrest totals to present a comprehensive view of Californians’ interactions with law enforcement each year. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 53 The Public Policy Institute of California is dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94111 T: 415.291.4400 F: 415.291.4401 PPIC.ORG PPIC Sacramento Center Senator Office Building 1121 L Street, Suite 801 Sacramento, CA 95814 T: 916.440.1120 F: 916.440.1121"
}
["___content":protected]=>
string(202) "
"
["_permalink":protected]=>
string(128) "https://www.ppic.org/publication/new-insights-into-california-arrests-trends-disparities-and-county-difference/1218mlr-appendix/"
["_next":protected]=>
array(0) {
}
["_prev":protected]=>
array(0) {
}
["_css_class":protected]=>
NULL
["id"]=>
int(17465)
["ID"]=>
int(17465)
["post_author"]=>
string(1) "4"
["post_content"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_date"]=>
string(19) "2018-12-03 20:02:26"
["post_excerpt"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_parent"]=>
int(17205)
["post_status"]=>
string(7) "inherit"
["post_title"]=>
string(100) "New Insights into California Arrests: Trends Disparities, and County Differences, Technical Appendix"
["post_type"]=>
string(10) "attachment"
["slug"]=>
string(16) "1218mlr-appendix"
["__type":protected]=>
NULL
["_wp_attached_file"]=>
string(20) "1218mlr-appendix.pdf"
["wpmf_size"]=>
string(7) "1008629"
["wpmf_filetype"]=>
string(3) "pdf"
["wpmf_order"]=>
string(1) "0"
["searchwp_content"]=>
string(118564) "New Insights into California Arrests Trends, Disparities, and County Differences Technical Appendices CONTENTS Appendix A. Statewide Arrest Types in Depth Appendix B. Statewide Arrest Demographics in Depth Appendix C. County Differences in Arrests Appendix D. Other Demographic Analyses Appendix E. Data and Methods Magnus Lofstrom, Brandon Martin, Justin Goss, Joseph Hayes, and Steven Raphael Supported with funding from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation Appendix A. Statewide Arrest Types in Depth Arrest trends Arrest rates have dropped dramatically in California since reaching peaks in 1989 and 1990. As Figure A1 shows, the overall arrest rate reached a high of 8,188 arrests per 100,000 residents in 1989 and, with the exception of the period 2002-2008, has since been on a steady decline. In 2016 it reached a historic low, of 3,428. While both felony and misdemeanor arrest rates have declined significantly since the early 1990s and have reached all-time low rates, misdemeanor arrests are the main contributor to the overall drop. The felony arrest rate declined from 2,135 in 1989 to 897 in 2016, while the misdemeanor arrest rate dropped from 6,053 to 2,530 over the same period. Though similar in terms of percentage decrease (57.9 percent and 58.8 percent respectively), the misdemeanor arrest rate decrease of 3,523 represents about three-quarters of the decline in the total arrest rate. Changes in arrest offenses Figure A1 also shows that while most arrests in California are for misdemeanor offenses, their share of all arrests fluctuates. The share of misdemeanors arrests ranged between 66 percent and 78 percent between 1980 and 2016. Interestingly, after having stayed mostly below 70 percent since the early 1990s, the share of misdemeanor arrests jumped from 66 percent in 2014 to 74 percent in 2015. The reclassification of a number of drug and property offenses from felony (or wobblers) to misdemeanors, as a result of Prop 47, is likely the main factor behind this sudden and noticeable recent change. FIGURE A1 Arrest rates have been on a downward trend since the early 1990s, and are now at historic lows Arrest Rate (Arrests per 100,000 Residents) 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% Misdemeanor Felony Total Misdemeanor Share of all Arrests SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. Among arrests for felony offenses, the dramatic and relatively consistent drop in the property arrest rate stands out. Figure A2 shows it reaching a 1980-2016 period peak in 1981 at a rate of 751 felony property arrests per 100,000 residents. The felony property arrest rate declined in the early 1980s before increasing until 1989, when it reached almost 750 again. Since then the felony property arrest rate has been on a quite consistent sharp downward trend, and now stands at 189 felony property arrests per 100,000 residents. Figure A2 also reveals significant declines since the late 1980s and early 1990s in the felony arrest rates for drugs and violent offenses. The Felony-Drug arrest rate dropped from 600 in 1988 to 99 in 2016. The Felony-Violent arrest rate dropped from 533 in 1990 to 291 in 2016. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 2 Felony Arrest Rate FIGURE A2 The Felony-Property arrest rate has been on a quite consistent long term downward trend since 1989 800 700 600 Drugs 500 Other Property 400 Supervision 300 Violent Warrant 200 Weapons 100 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of felony arrests per 100,000 residents. The composition of felony arrests have also changed markedly. Figure A3 shows that in 1980, 44.9 percent of felony arrests were for a property offense. By 1990, this share dropped to 33.7 percent and by 2016, 21.1 percent of all felony arrests were for property offenses. Felony arrests for drug offenses grew from 16.6 percent of felony arrests in 1980 to 23.8 percent in 2010, and by 2014 had climbed to 27.6 percent. With the passing and implementation of Prop 47 in November of 2014, the Felony-Drug arrest figure dropped sharply, and now stands at 11.1 percent of felony arrests. While arrests for violent offenses made up less than one-quarter of felony arrests in 1980, it now represents almost one-third of arrests for felonies. The noticeable increase is recent, starting right after passage of Prop 47 passed. From 2014 to 2015, the felony arrest share jumped from 22.9 percent to 31.5 percent. It is worthwhile noting that the increase in the share of arrests for Felony-Violent offenses is due to the much larger drop in overall felony arrests (by about 131,000), compared to the decline in arrests for felonious violent offenses (by nearly 1,600) between 2014 and 2015. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 3 Share of Felony Arrests FIGURE A3 The Most Common Felony Arrest Type Has Shifted from Property to Violent Offenses 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Other Supervision Warrant Violent Weapons Drugs Property SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Percentages are shares of felony arrests. Recent years have also seen major shifts in the number and composition of misdemeanor arrests. The most notable changes in Figure A4 are the drop in misdemeanor arrest rates for traffic and alcohol related offenses, and the recent increase in the drug arrest rate. The traffic arrest rate decreased from its peak in 1990 of 2,444 to 642 in 2016. Law enforcement officers are also arresting fewer individuals for misdemeanor alcohol related offenses. The Misdemeanor-Alcohol arrest rate is on a long-term downward trend, declining from 1,403 in 1980 to 229 in 2016. It is not surprising to see an increase in the Misdemeanor-Drug arrest rate after 2014, given that Prop 47 reclassified a number of drug and property offenses from felonies (or wobblers) to misdemeanors: it almost doubled, increasing from 239 in 2014 to 460 in 2016. There is, however, almost no change in the post-Prop 47 Misdemeanor-Property arrest rate; it went from 179 in 2014 to 182 in 2016. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 4 FIGURE A4 California saw significant drops in misdemeanor arrest rates for traffic and alcohol related offenses but the MisdemeanorDrug arrest rate recently went up 3000 Misdemeanor Arrest Rate 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of misdemeanor arrests per 100,000 residents. While traffic arrests are the most common misdemeanor arrest category, their share of the total has dropped from 36.1 percent in 1980 to 25.4 percent in 2016 (Figure A5). Alcohol-related misdemeanor arrests fell even faster over the period. In 1980, alcohol-related misdemeanors accounted for more than one-quarter of total misdemeanor arrests; they had fallen to one in eleven misdemeanor arrests in 2016. Conversely, the relative share of misdemeanor arrests for Failure to Appear in court (FTA), or warrants, jumped from 5.7 percent in 1980 to 17.6 percent in 2016. While the increase in the FTA share of misdemeanor arrests between 1980 and 1990 was primarily due to a notable increase in the arrest rate (from 304 to 623), the increase in the share since then is primarily due to a larger decrease in the overall misdemeanor arrest rate, compared to the relative stabilization in the rate of law enforcement FTA arrests. Last, although a relatively small share of misdemeanor arrests, the share for battery/assault arrests almost doubled between 1980 and 2016, from 4.4 percent to 8.1 percent. As Figure A4 shows, this was not caused by an increase in the misdemeanor battery/assault arrest rate, which remained fairly stable during that period, but rather by the significant decrease in the overall misdemeanor arrest rate. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 5 Share of Misdemeanor Arrests FIGURE A5 Traffic and alcohol related arrests as shares of misdemeanor arrests have dropped substantially 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Other FTA/Warrant Battery/Assault Property Drugs Alcohol Traffic SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Percentages are shares of misdemeanor arrests. The most common arrest offenses A closer look at the data reveals that, despite decreasing markedly in absolute number over several years, misdemeanor arrests for traffic offenses, especially driving under the influence, represented the most common arrests in California (Table A1) during most of the years examined. Most recently, however, misdemeanor arrests for drug violations (nearly 164,000) moved to the top of the list of most common arrest offenses. The other most common misdemeanor arrests are for public intoxication and battery and assaults. Burglary (with about 84,000 arrests) represented the most common felony arrest in 1980. By 2016, assaults (more than 87,000) had moved to the top of the list, with the number of arrests for burglary dropping to slightly above 23,000. Arrests for drug offenses (such as possession, sales, giving to a minor and transportation of narcotics and dangerous drugs) were among the most common felony arrests for most years over the period studied, though no drug offenses were among the five most common felony arrest offense post-Prop 47 period. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 6 TABLE A1 Misdemeanor arrests for traffic offense declined but continue to be among the most common arrests in California 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Misdemeanors DUI Drunk Selected Traffic Petty Theft Outside Warrant 302,868 242,331 146,163 113,739 57,569 DUI Miscellaneous Traffic Drunk Petty Theft CI/CO Ordinances 353,886 294,310 190,715 141,905 111,515 DUI Miscellaneous Traffic Drunk Assault and Battery Failure to Appear/Non Traffic 178,431 138,748 114,023 80,994 80,076 DUI Miscellaneous Traffic Drunk Failure to Appear/Non Traffic Assault and Battery 193,280 174,266 107,714 102,030 88,037 Other Drug Law Violations DUI Miscellaneous Traffic Failure to Appear/Non Traffic Assault and Battery 163,959 125,963 110,463 106,894 80,968 Felonies Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Number of Arrests Arrest Offense Burglary 84,160 Assault 106,781 Assault Theft 51,047 Narcotics 91,136 Dangerous Drugs Assault 48,955 Burglary 79,911 Narcotics Motor Vehicle Theft 29,514 Theft 67,085 Burglary Robbery 26,715 Motor Vehicle Theft 47,221 Theft SOURCES: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register (1980-2016). Number of Arrests 108,808 57,866 53,014 46,978 43,672 Arrest Offense Assault Dangerous Drugs Burglary Theft Narcotics Number of Arrests 92,030 63,983 52,716 45,459 39,562 Arrest Offense Assault Other Felonies Theft Outside Warrant Burglary Number of Arrests 87,415 37,841 27,643 26,290 23,209 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 7 Appendix B. Statewide Arrest Demographics in Depth Race/Ethnicity There is pronounced racial disparity in arrests in California, but the gaps are growing smaller. In 1980, the arrest rate of African-Americans was 16,653 per 100,000 residents, considerably higher than the rate for Latinos (9,294) and whites (5,553). In other words, there were 11,000 more arrests per 100,000 African-Americans than there were arrests per 100,000 whites that year—an arrest rate of African-Americans that is three times higher than that of whites. There are also significant differences between Latinos and whites. The Latino arrest rate was 1.7 times greater than the white arrest rate in 1980. Arrest rates grew for all three groups in the 1980s, but more so for African Americans, increasing the disparity. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, the African American arrest rate was more than three times greater than the white arrest rate. Since the 1990s, arrest rates have declined substantially, and more so among African Americans, reducing some of the differences across race/ethnicity from that peak. In 2016, the African American arrest rate was 9,765— lower than the peak—though still three times greater than the white arrest rate of 3,235. The 2016 Latino arrest rate (3,606) is now 1.11 times higher than the white rate. Lastly, the race/ethnic group labeled Other (which includes those of Asian, Pacific Islander, American Indian and Alaska Native origin) continues to have the lowest arrest rates in California.1 After growing from about 11,000 in 1980 to about 15,400 in 1989, the difference between the African-American and white arrest rates has dropped remarkably, and now stands at about 6,500—the lowest observed between 1980 and 2016. The arrest rate difference between Latinos and whites dropped dramatically, and is now about one-tenth of what it was at its peak in 1990, having fallen from 4,100 more arrests per 100,000 residents to 370. FIGURE B1 There is pronounced racial disparity in arrests in California, but the gaps are growing smaller 25000 20000 Arrest Rate 15000 10000 5000 African American Latino Other White 0 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. 1We observe small number of arrests of individuals in these race/ethnic groups for some offenses. Hence, to ensure no personally identifiable information is released, we combined these groups into an Other category. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 8 California’s changing demographics drive at least part of these shifts. The state’s Latino population more than doubled its share of the total between 1980 and 2016, going from 19.3 to 38.9 percent. During this period, the Latino share of total arrests also grew. The Latino share grew from 25.9 percent of all arrests in 1980 to 41.4 percent in 2016 (Figure B9). Beginning in 2002, Latinos accounted for the largest share of arrests in California. Adult whites represented 36.0 percent of all arrests in the state in 2016 while the African-American share of all arrests was 16.3 percent in 2016 (down from a peak of 19.1 in 1988). FIGURE B2 Like its share of California’s population, the arrest share of Latinos is growing 60% 50% Share of Arrests (by Race) 40% 30% 20% African American Latino Other White 10% 0% SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Figure shows the race/ethnic group shares of all annual arrests. While most of the declines in all arrests are due to the fall in misdemeanor arrests, the decrease in felony arrests among African Americans stands out, and accounts for 48 percent of the overall peak-to-2016 decline in the African American arrest rate. Figure B1 shows the change in felony and misdemeanor arrest rates, by race/ethnic group, between the peak and 2016, as well as from 1980 and 2016. The African American felony arrest rate dropped a remarkable 5,693 from its peak (in 1989) and 2016 (from 8,922 to 3,229). In other words, there were 5,693 fewer felony arrests of African Americans per 100,000 African American residents in 2016 compared to 1989. By comparison, the second largest peak-to-2016 decline in arrests for felony offenses, 1,642, was among Latinos. The felony arrest rate for whites and the Other race/ethnicity group also declined over the same period (638 and 786 respectively). Misdemeanor rates also declined across race/ethic groups. The African American misdemeanor rate was nearly halved (from 12,801 to 6,535, a decline of 48.9 percent). The Latino rate dropped 5,051 accounting for about 75 percent of the group’s decline in arrests. And again, the white (down 2,814) and Other (down 2,697) misdemeanor arrest rates also fell, accounting for almost 80 percent of those groups’ decrease in the overall arrest rate. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 9 FIGURE B3 Most of the declines in arrest rates are due to the drops in misdemeanor arrests African American 0 Latino Other White -1000 Period Changing Arrest Rates -2000 -3000 -4000 -5000 -6000 -7000 1980-2016 Change, Felony Peak-2016 Change, Felony 1980-2016 Change, Misdemeanor Peak-2016 Change, Misdemeanor SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. Noticeable drops in arrests for Felony-Drugs and property offenses are the main contributors to the decrease in felony arrests. Since the declines are greater among African Americans and Latinos, these are also key contributors to the decrease in ethnic/racial disparity in overall arrests. Among felony arrests, the highest arrest rates for all four race/ethnic groups in 1980 were for property offenses (Figure B4). The Felony-Property arrest rates have since plummeted; from 2,687 to 640 in 2016 for African Americans, from 908 to 203 for Latinos, from 517 to 161 for whites, and from 259 to 68 for all others. The significantly slower rate of decrease in the Felony-Violent arrest rates has led to felony violent arrest rates now being greater than the felony property arrest rates for all four groups. In 2016, arrests for felony property offenses accounted for about one-fifth of all felony arrests for all four groups while arrests for violent offenses make up roughly one-third. Arrests for Felony-Drugs also have fallen significantly, particularly for African Americans. The African American Felony-Drugs arrest rate declined by more than 90 percent from its peak in the late 1980s to 2016 (3,088 to 287). The Latino felony drug arrest rate also fell over the period from a high of 710 to 104 (a decrease of about 85 percent). Among whites and the Other race group, the Felony-Drug arrest rates also dropped significantly from their peaks, as measured in percentage terms—77.3 percent and 75.7 percent respectively. As measured as changes in the arrest rates, the respective peak-to-2016 decreases, however, are much smaller than the decreases among African Americans and Latinos. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 10 FIGURE B4 Declines in arrests for drug and property offenses are the main contributor to the decrease in felony arrests Felony Arrest Rate African American 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Drugs Other Property Supervision Violent Warrant Weapons Felony Arrest Rate - Latino 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Drugs Other Property Supervision Violent Warrant Weapons 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 Felony Arrest Rate - White 600 500 Felony Arrest Rate - Other 500 Drugs 450 400 Drugs 400 Other 350 Other 300 200 Property Supervision Violent 300 250 200 150 Property Supervision Violent 100 Warrant 100 50 Warrant 0 Weapons 0 Weapons 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 1980 1983 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 2010 2013 2016 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. The noticeable bump in 1990 in the felony arrest rate of the racial/ethnic Other group is driven by an increase in individuals classified in that group in Los Angeles. At this point, it is unclear what factor explains the temporary jump. Most of the drop in misdemeanor arrests between 1980 and 2016 stems from fewer misdemeanor arrests for alcohol and traffic offenses. All groups have seen sharp decreases in misdemeanor traffic arrests since the early 1990s. The largest peak-to-2016 decline is among Latinos, where the Misdemeanor-Traffic arrest rate fell by 2,410 (from 3,232 in 1990 to 822 in 2016). The drop was nearly as large among African Americans, for whom the Misdemeanor-Traffic arrest rate went from 3,568 in 1983 to 1,345 in 2016. The white and Other MisdemeanorTraffic arrest rates dropped from 2,318 in 1985 to 488 in 2016 (whites) and 1,497 in 1990 to 331 in 2016 (Other race/ethnicity group). The peak-to-2016 decreases in Misdemeanor-Alcohol arrests were almost as large; dropping by 2,045 arrests per 100,000 residents for Latinos, 1,698 for African-Americans, 870 among whites, and by 699 among the group consisting of all other races/ethnicities. Lastly, the data also reveal that the Misdemeanor-Drug arrest rates for all groups, roughly doubled between 2014 and 2016. Among African Americans, the rate went from 426 to 886, while among whites it jumped from 279 to 548. For Latinos the misdemeanor drug arrest rate went from 240 to 452, while it increased from 75 to 138 for the Other race/ethnic group. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 11 FIGURE B5 Sharp decreases in misdemeanor arrests for alcohol and traffic offenses account for most of the drop in misdemeanor arrests Misdemeanor Arrest Rate African American 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic Misdemeanor Arrest Rate Latino 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 Misdemeanor Arrest Rate White 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0 Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic Misdemeanor Arrest Rate Other 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 1980 1984 1988 1992 1996 2000 2004 2008 2012 2016 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of misdemeanor arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. Examining the relative share of arrests by race/ethnicity and type of arrest offense reveal several noteworthy trends and differences across groups (Table B1). It is important to keep in mind that the trends in arrests shares are at least partly due to demographic changes, as discussed above. Nonetheless, the shares gives us relevant information about who is arrested in California, and for what types of offenses. One of the most notable changes is the drop in the African-American share of felony drug arrests. As Table B1 shows, this share fell nearly in half between 1990 and 2016, from 31.3 percent of all Felony-Drug arrests to 16.5 percent. In fact, it dropped by even more than half when compared to its 1988 peak of 36.7 percent. The white share of Felony-Drug arrests also declined, from 53 percent in 1980 to 34 percent in 2016. Meanwhile, the Latino share of Felony-Drug arrests has been growing, from 16.7 percent in 1980 to 31.1 percent in 1990, and now stands at 41.3 percent of all Felony-Drug arrests. The decline in the African-American share of felony violent arrests is also noteworthy. In 1980, whites and African-Americans represented roughly 1/3 each of all arrests for felony violent offenses (35 and 34 percent respectively). Both shares have dropped, but by more among African Americans. Today, about 29 percent of Felony-Violent arrests are of whites, while 22 percent are of African Americans. The changes in the share of Felony-Warrant arrests also stand out; for whites, it declined from 61.5 percent in 1980 to 38.2 percent in 2016 while increasing among the other three groups, including a doubling of the share for PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 12 Latinos. Similarly, the white share of Felony-Weapon arrests decreased over the same period, from 46.2 percent to 25.7, while it increasing among the other three groups. Finally, the distribution of Misdemeanor-Traffic and Property arrests by race/ethnicity has changed over time. While whites accounted for 58.3 percent of misdemeanor traffic arrests in 1980, they now account for only 29.0 percent. The share of Latinos almost doubled over the same period, going from 26.8 percent to 50.3 percent. The decrease in the African American share of Misdemeanor-Drug arrests is also notable, dropping from 20.6 percent in 1980 to 11 percent in 2016. For property crimes, while whites had the largest share of arrests for both felony and misdemeanors in 1980 (46.8 percent and 53.3 percent respectively), their property offenses shares mostly decreased over the period 1980-2016. One exception is the recent increase in the white share of misdemeanor arrests for property offenses, which increased from 31.2 percent in 2010 to 37.0 percent in 2016 (an upward trend that started in 2009). PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 13 TABLE B1 Shares of arrests by offense level and race/ethnicity Year 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1980 1990 2000 White 46.8% 35.6% 33.9% 33.5% 32.4% 53.1% 33.8% 38.7% 37.9% 34.5% 35.5% 29.9% 31.4% 28.6% 28.6% 46.2% 37.6% 31.7% 25.1% 25.7% 61.5% 45.7% 38.0% 36.8% 38.2% 52.2% 37.0% 38.0% 34.4% 34.9% 40.3% 45.7% 39.7% Felony Offenses African American Latino Property 27.3% 23.8% 25.0% 32.8% 23.2% 35.6% 20.5% 39.4% 19.3% 42.2% Drugs 28.9% 16.7% 31.3% 31.1% 23.3% 34.0% 18.0% 38.8% 16.5% 41.3% Violent 33.7% 28.2% 28.9% 35.1% 22.0% 40.2% 22.4% 42.8% 22.4% 42.5% Weapons 20.7% 30.1% 21.5% 34.8% 18.1% 44.3% 20.0% 50.2% 22.9% 47.0% Warrant 20.5% 16.0% 29.5% 22.0% 23.9% 32.9% 23.5% 34.0% 21.9% 34.2% Supervision 21.4% 24.3% 35.1% 25.4% 29.7% 29.7% 26.4% 35.4% 23.4% 37.5% Other 16.3% 40.5% 22.2% 27.8% 20.8% 34.0% Other 2.1% 6.5% 7.4% 6.6% 6.1% 1.3% 3.8% 4.1% 5.3% 7.7% 2.7% 6.1% 6.4% 6.2% 6.6% 3.1% 6.2% 5.9% 4.7% 4.5% 2.0% 2.9% 5.2% 5.7% 5.6% 2.2% 2.5% 2.6% 3.9% 4.2% 2.9% 4.3% 5.6% PPIC.ORG" White 53.3% 38.9% 33.6% 31.2% 37.0% 55.1% 40.2% 45.3% 42.6% 45.3% 53.7% 42.2% 38.7% 33.5% 32.7% 54.2% 47.3% 47.8% 46.7% 46.1% 59.2% 51.0% 41.8% 34.9% 38.8% 58.3% 49.9% 36.9% 30.9% 29.0% 55.3% 37.9% 40.5% Misdemeanor Offenses African American Latino Property 18.7% 22.9% 17.0% 34.2% 18.6% 37.9% 16.2% 42.4% 18.9% 36.7% Drugs 20.6% 22.6% 20.3% 35.6% 17.8% 33.1% 13.7% 38.5% 11.0% 38.6% Assault/Battery 19.7% 23.7% 23.0% 28.6% 19.3% 35.7% 19.7% 40.7% 20.2% 40.4% Alcohol 11.3% 31.2% 13.1% 35.4% 10.5% 36.7% 10.4% 37.3% 11.0% 36.5% FTA/Warrant 18.8% 20.0% 19.0% 26.6% 18.0% 35.9% 21.2% 39.5% 16.4% 40.3% Traffic 12.7% 26.8% 9.6% 34.4% 10.1% 46.5% 11.2% 50.3% 12.0% 50.3% Other 21.1% 20.7% 21.4% 32.7% 17.8% 35.2% Other 5.0% 9.9% 9.9% 10.2% 7.4% 1.8% 3.8% 3.8% 5.3% 5.1% 2.8% 6.1% 6.3% 6.2% 6.7% 3.3% 4.3% 5.0% 5.5% 6.4% 2.0% 3.4% 4.3% 4.4% 4.5% 2.2% 6.0% 6.5% 7.6% 8.7% 2.9% 7.9% 6.5% Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 14 Felony Offenses Misdemeanor Offenses White African American Latino Other White African American Latino 2010 33.2% 19.2% 42.4% 5.3% 33.6% 18.3% 2016 34.4% 18.9% 40.7% 5.9% 38.0% 19.4% SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. 41.9% 36.1% Other 6.2% 6.4% Age groups Like the offenses individuals are arrest for—and the population of California—the demographic composition of individuals arrested has changed since 1980. Regarding the age of arrestees, the data show a precipitous drop in arrests of younger suspects—both juveniles (17 and younger) and those between the ages of 18 and 24 (Table B2). Among juveniles, the number of annual arrests plummeted between 1980 and 2016, falling from about 258,000 to about 60,000 (a decrease of 76.7 percent). Among those between 18 and 24, arrests dropped by more than one-half (52.2 percent) from roughly 611,000 to almost 292,000. Arrests of individuals 25 to 29 also decreased, from about 274,000 to 239,000 (a decline of 12.8 percent). The number of arrests increased for all older age groups. It is especially striking for those between 50 and 59 years of age, where the number nearly doubled, from about 75,000 to more than 144,000 (an increase of 93.3 percent). While the direction of these trends mirrors those of the state’s population—California is aging, and the younger age groups now represent smaller shares of the population than they did in 1980—the magnitudes of the changes in arrests are significantly greater than the shifts in the state’s population. For example, the population share of the youngest age group (0-17) declined but only by 3.5 percentage points between 1980 and 2016 (declining from 27 percent to 23.5). The share of California’s population between 50 and 59 increased but only by about 3 percentage points (from 10.1 percent to 13.1 percent) over the same period. TABLE B2 Arrests of the state’s youngest residents have dropped drastically Year 0-17 18-24 25-29 Age Group 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or Older 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 257,893 236,832 214,903 165,843 59,988 611,071 731,002 445,894 455,156 291,982 274,240 489,631 228,672 263,996 239,001 281,772 631,092 417,719 348,214 352,984 125,626 220,057 265,068 278,230 213,973 74,596 67,334 79,495 140,062 144,165 33,094 33,175 23,857 35,509 45,345 Change, 1980-2016 (Number) -197,905 -319,089 -35,239 71,212 88,347 Change, 1980-2016 (Percent) -76.7% -52.2% -12.8% 25.3% 70.3% SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. 69,569 93.3% 12,251 37.0% PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 15 Figure B6 shows that arrest rates in California are highest among young adults but that the differences across adult age groups have decreased. While the arrest rate decreased between 1980 and 2016 for all age groups, the largest declines as measured by percent change, were among juveniles and 18-24 year olds. For juveniles, the arrest rate dropped from 4,011 arrest per 100,000 juveniles in 1980 to 648 in 2016, a decrease of 83.8 percent. Among 18-24 year olds, the arrest rate declined from 18,692 to 6,914, a drop of 63 percent. Regarding differences across groups, the data show that while the arrest rate of juveniles in 1980 was higher than that of 50-59 year olds (4,011 and 3,101, respectively) in 2016 the juvenile arrest rate was less than one-quarter of the rate for 50-59 year olds (648 and 2,807, respectively). FIGURE B6 Arrest rates have dropped the most for the state’s younger population 25,000 Arrest Rate 20,000 15,000 10,000 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 5,000 0 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or Older SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. The decline in arrest rates across all age groups does not apply to felonies, however. While the rates continue to be lower than those among younger adults, felony arrest rates increased for the age groups of individuals 30 and older. The 50-59 age group exhibited the greatest percentage increase; its felony arrest rate rose from 271 in 1980 to 568 in 2016 (109.6 percent). The decreases in the felony arrest rates of juveniles and the youngest adult group, 18-24, are striking. In 1980, the juvenile felony arrest rate stood at 1,526. It now stands at 218, a decrease of 85.7 percent. The corresponding change among 18-24 year olds is a decline from 4,692 to 1,945 (58.5 percent). Also noteworthy is that, while the felony arrest rate of 18-24 year olds was significantly higher that of 25-29 year olds in the 1980s and 1990s, the pattern shifted in the 2000s, and the rate is now lower than that of 25-29 year olds. Furthermore, while the felony arrest rate of the youngest adults in California was more than three times higher than the felony arrest rate of 30-39 year olds, it is now just slightly higher (1,945 and 1,820, respectively). PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 16 FIGURE B7 While still lower than younger adults, the felony arrest rates went up between 1980 and 2016 for age groups 30 and older 6,000 Felony Arrest Rate 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 1,000 0 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60 or Older SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of felony arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. The age group trends for misdemeanor arrests are quite similar to the broader arrest trends (Figure B8). The biggest decreases are among juveniles and young adults. For juveniles, the misdemeanor arrest rate continuously declined between 1980 and 2016, dropping from 2,484 in 1980 to 430 in 2016 (a decrease of 82.7 percent). Among 18-24 year olds, the misdemeanor arrest rate fell by more than 9,000 arrests per 100,000 residents; from 13,999 to 4,969 (a decline of 64.5 percent). The data also reveal some recent increases in misdemeanor arrests. While the misdemeanor arrest rate of 50-59 year olds decreased between 1980 and 2016, from 2,830 to 2,239, since 2000 it has been slowly increasing. In 2000, it stood at 1,731, in 2010 it was 2,155 and in 2016 it stood at 2,239. Misdemeanor arrests increased somewhat between 2010 and 2016 for other age groups as well: from 6,693 to 6,911 for 25-29 year olds, from 4,600-4,775 among 30-39 year olds, and 456 to 490 among those 60 and older. FIGURE B8 While misdemeanor arrest rates declined for most age groups, it increased for those 50 and older 18,000 Misdemeanor Arrest Rate 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-29 40-49 50-59 60 or Older SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 17 Gender Historically, male adult arrest rates have been dramatically higher than the corresponding female arrest rates, but the gaps are decreasing (Figure B9). The male arrest rate was more than six times higher than the female arrest rate in 1980 (12,253 and 1,840, respectively). After reaching a peak in 1989 of 13,741, the adult male arrest rate quite steadily declined to 5,270 by 2016 (a decrease of 61.6 percent). The female adult arrest rate also peaked in 1989 and has since declined, but less so. In 1989 it stood at 2,631 but fell more slowly to 1,603, a drop of 39.1 percent. While still significantly higher, the adult male arrest rate is now only 3.3 times higher than the female adult rate, a ratio that has held quite steady since 2010. As of 2016, male and female adult arrest rates are the lowest observed between 1980 and 2016. FIGURE B9 Male arrest rates are substantially higher than female arrest rates, but the gap is decreasing 16,000 14,000 12,000 Female Male Total Arrest Rate 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group. In terms of the relative share of total arrests, while the vast majority continue to be of males, an increasing share of arrests are of females (Figure B10). Roughly one in eight arrests of adults were of females in 1980. This share has since steadily grown and now almost one in four adult arrests are of females. FIGURE B10 While the vast majority of arrests in California continue to be of males, an increasing share of arrests are of females 100% 90% 80% 86.6% 83.8% 80.7% 77.1% 76.5% Share of Arrests (by Gender) 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 13.4% 16.2% 19.3% 22.9% 23.5% 10% 0% 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Figure shows the shares of all (felony and misdemeanor) annual arrests by gender, for females and males separately. Female Male PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 18 The offenses for which males and females are arrested for are significantly different and exhibit some different trends. The highest felony arrest rates in 1980 among both men and women were for property offenses (Table B3). Furthermore, the felony property arrest rate is much higher for men, and while both have dropped significantly over the last decade, the decrease among men is greater. The male Felony-Property arrest rate was 1,310 in 1980, nearly seven times greater than the female Felony-Property arrest rate of 188. By 2016, the FelonyProperty arrest rates had dropped to 287 and 92 respectively for men and women (corresponding to decreases of 78.1 percent and 50.1 percent). With the stronger downward trend among men, the male arrest rate for felony property crimes is now slightly more than three times greater than that of women. Violent offenses now account for the plurality of felony arrests for both males and females. While in 1980 the male arrest rate for Felony-Property offenses (1,310) was almost twice the male Felony-Violent arrest rate (699), since the mid-1990s it has been lower, and is now 38 percent lower than the male Felony-Property arrest rate (287 and 464, respectively). Felony arrests for violent offenses by females increased sharply from a low below 100 arrests per 100,000 females in the mid-1980s to a 1997 peak of 146. As of 2016, it stood at 120. Arrests for Felony-Drug arrests have dropped sharply after reaching peaks in the late 1980s. Male Felony-Drug arrest rate dropped from 803 per 100,000 males in 1990 to 165 in 2016 (Table B3). Among women, the FelonyDrug arrest rate dropped from 173 to 34 over the same period. Other notable gender felony arrests trends include a decrease in Felony-Weapons arrests among men over the last decades while among women it increased. The male Felony-Weapon arrest rate however continues to be significantly higher than the female rate, 102 and 8 respectively. Felony-Supervision arrest rates for both men and women are now considerably higher than they were in 1980; increasing from 19 to 76 for men and from 2 to 8 among women. However, they are now significantly lower than their peaks in 2008, when they reached 174 and 22 respectively. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 19 TABLE B3 While felony arrests for some offenses have gone up, arrest rates for the most common offenses are down Felony Offense Category Males Year Drugs Property Violent Weapons Supervision Warrant Other 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 Change, 1980-2016 (Rate) Change, 1980-2016 (Percent) 460.2 803.1 600.7 516.7 165.2 -295 -64.1% 1310.5 1149.9 559.0 460.6 287.1 -1,023 -78.1% 698.9 964.7 702.8 543.7 464.4 -235 -33.6% 116.2 118.5 90.4 116.1 101.9 18.8 66.6 116.7 143.3 76.1 -14 -12.3% 57 304.8% 61.5 118.2 152.3 122.3 106.9 45 73.8% 272.9 280.4 242.7 273.5 247.2 -26 -9.4% Year Drugs Property Violent Females Weapons Supervision Warrant Other 1980 92.5 188.1 73.9 5.8 2.0 9.3 30.7 1990 173.3 228.8 102.1 6.6 8.1 24.7 51.5 2000 155.1 175.7 131.6 6.1 15.0 37.5 57.0 2010 135.2 178.3 123.6 8.9 14.5 32.6 64.4 2016 33.8 92.2 119.6 7.9 8.0 27,2 62.6 Change, 1980-2016 (Rate) -59 -96 46 2 6 18 32 Change, 1980-2016 (Percent) -63.5% -51.0% 61.8% 36.2% 300.0% 192.5% 103.9% SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of felony arrests per 100,000 residents, by offense category, of the relevant demographic group. Misdemeanor arrest rates for traffic and alcohol offenses are down sharply for both men and women compared to the 1980s and early 1990s. Table B4 shows that the male arrest rate for misdemeanor traffic offenses dropped from 3,505 in 1980 to 981 in 2016 (a decline of 72 percent). For women the rate decreased from 379 to 306 (a drop of 19.3 percent). For both men and women, the misdemeanor arrest rate for alcohol offenses declined even more: from 2,569 to 364 for men and from 268 to 94 for women (decreases of 85.8 percent and 64.9 percent respectively). Misdemeanor arrests for property offenses are also down noticeably, by more than 60 percent for both men and women. Among men, the Misdemeanor-Property arrest rate decreased from 669 in 1980 to 222 in 2016, and among women it dropped from 372 to 142. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 20 Trends for drug misdemeanors are noticeably different from traffic, alcohol, and property arrest trends. Among men, the Misdemeanor-Drug arrest rate grew in the 1980s, from 485 in 1980 to a peak of 730 in 1988. In subsequent years, the rate both dipped and rose, sometimes sharply, until it settled at 717 in 2016. The Misdemeanor-Drug arrest trend among women is similar to that of the men, but with somewhat less fluctuation in the 1980s and 1990s. Interestingly, the female Misdemeanor-Drug arrest rate increased sharply between 2013 and 2016, almost doubling, going from 106 to 206. Also noteworthy, while the female Misdemeanor-Assault/battery arrest rate is not dramatically different from what it was in the 1990s, and lower than it was in the 2000s, it is now higher than it was in 1980. Among men, the Misdemeanor-Assault/battery arrest rate has continuously decreased since the late 1980s and is now, at 306, close to the lowest observed since 1980 (302 in 2013). TABLE B4 Misdemeanor arrest rates for traffic and alcohol offenses are down sharply Year 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 Traffic 3,505 4,197 1,719 1,621 981 Alcohol 2,569 1,534 854 635 364 Misdemeanor Offense Category Males Drugs Property FTA/ Warrant 485 669 550 559 636.5 1,064 577 286 738 547 199 717 717 222 667 Assault/ Battery 410 463 368 357 306 Other 1,125 1,592 988 756 564 Change, 1980-2016 (Rate) Change, 1980-2016 (Percent) -2,524 -72.0% -2,205 -85.8% 232 47.8% -447 -66.8% 117 21.3% -104 -25.4% -561 -49.9% Year 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 Traffic 379 695 333 486 306 Alcohol 268 212 149 145 94 Drugs 76 162 155 148 206 Females Property 372 365 181 197 142 FTA/ Warrant 64 184 173 215 227 Assault/ Battery 64 96 110 116 107 Other 216 308 212 195 168 Change, 1980-2016 (Rate) -73 -174 130 -230 163 43 -48 Change, 1980-2016 (Percent) -19.3% -64.9% 171.1% -61.8% 254.7% 67.2% -22.2% SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of misdemeanor arrests per 100,000 residents, by offense category, of the relevant demographic group. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 21 The above discussion identifies a number of instances where female arrest rates have increased more, or decreased less, than male arrest rates. An important consequence of these trends is that women increasingly make up a greater share of arrests in California. Figure B11 shows the trends in the female shares of felony arrests by felony offense groups. The two most notable increases in the female share of felony arrests are for property and violent offenses. The share of Felony-Property arrests more than doubled between 1980 and 2010 (from 12.9 to 28.1 percent). Since then, the female share has come down somewhat, to 24.5 percent. The female share of felony violent offenses stayed quite constant around 10 percent in the 1980s and then started a steady climb, to 20.6 percent of all Felony-Violent arrests in California. The recent drop in the female share of Felony-Drug arrests is also noticeable in Figure B6. After staying relatively steady at slightly above 20 percent since the late 1990s, it decreased from 21.5 percent in 2014 to 17.1 percent in 2016. FIGURE B11 The female share of felony arrests has increased for most felony offense groups 30% Female Shares of Felony Arrests 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% Drugs Other Property Supervision Violent Warrant Weapons 0% 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Figure shows the female shares of felony arrests by felony offense groups. The female share of arrests for misdemeanor offenses is also increasing, doubling for several misdemeanor offense groups (Figure B12). The female share of arrests for Misdemeanor-Alcohol offenses has been steadily increasing, from 9.7 percent in 1980 to 20.7 percent in 2016. The female share of arrests for Misdemeanor-Traffic offenses increased from 10 to 23.9 percent over the same period, while the female share of misdemeanor arrests for FTA or an outstanding warrant went from 10.6 percent 25.6 percent. The data also reveal significant increases in the female shares of arrests for Misdemeanor-Assault/battery as well as drug offenses. These shares increased from 13.9 to 26.1 percent between 1980 and 2016 for assault/battery offenses, and from 13.8 percent to 22.5 percent for Misdemeanor-Drug offense. Lastly, the offense with the highest female share of arrests— Misdemeanor-Property offenses—grew considerably in the 1990s and the 2000s, reaching almost 50 percent in 2010. Since then it has declined to 39.3 percent. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 22 FIGURE B12 The female share of arrests for misdemeanor offenses are increasing, doubling for several misdemeanor offense groups 60% Female Shares of Misdemeanor Arrests 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Alcohol Assault Drugs FTA/Warrant Other Property Traffic SOURCE: California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 1980-2016. NOTE: Figure shows the female shares of misdemeanor arrests by misdemeanor offense groups. Appendix C. County Differences in Arrests The analyses of arrests trends in California in the prior appendices reveal noticeable changes over time, including reduced differences across age, gender and race/ethnicity categories. They also show that in spite of the decreased variation across groups, substantial disparities remain. In this appendix we examine how arrests differ across counties in California with a focus on the most recent data currently available (2016). Before proceeding, it is important to note two qualifications for the analysis which follows. First, in counties with small populations, arrest statistics can be heavily skewed by unusual events or the actions of few individuals. For that reason, we limit our county analysis of race/ethnicity differences to the 49 counties with overall populations of at least 25,000. Second, many factors are likely to contribute to these differences, including crime rates, the composition of crimes, the number of law enforcement officers, policing practices, demographics, fiscal considerations, and jail capacity. As we noted elsewhere, understanding the role of determinants of arrest rate differences across counties and communities is fundamental to a better understanding of law enforcement discretion and racial disparities. The purpose of this report, however, is to provide a starting point for such a discussion by providing basic information on arrests: what individuals are arrested for, and who is being arrested, and how these differ across the state. Subsequent research will begin to delve further into the drivers behind these differences. The number of arrests per 100,000 residents varies substantially across counties (Figure C1). The counties with the five highest total arrest rates (the height of the bar, which is felony and misdemeanor arrests combined) are found in the counties of Lake (7,906 annual arrests per 100,000 county residents), Siskiyou (6,862), Shasta (6,672), Trinity (6,559), and Butte (6,394). The lowest total arrest rates are found mostly in large counties. The five lowest rates are in Los Angeles (2,800), Sacramento (2,797), San Francisco (2,603), Santa Clara (2,576), and Riverside (2,479) counties. As the figure indicates, misdemeanor arrests make up the majority of all arrests in most counties. In fact, at least two-thirds of all arrests are misdemeanors in all but six counties: Lassen (66.2 percent), Yuba (63.5 percent), PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 23 Sacramento (63.1 percent), San Francisco (62.3 percent), Trinity (58.8 percent) and Sierra (49.3 percent). The highest shares of misdemeanor arrests are found in San Luis Obispo (85.1 percent), Santa Barbara (83.5 percent), San Mateo (82.7 percent) and Sonoma (82.1 percent). The counties with the highest felony rates are all rural counties: Trinity (with 2,705 felony arrests per 100,000 residents), Sierra (2,451), Siskiyou (2,127), Lake (1,913), and Yuba (1,853). The five counties with the lowest felony arrest rates are mostly large urban counties, with three in the San Francisco Bay Area: San Luis Obispo (752), Orange County (659), Santa Clara (655), San Mateo, (573) and Marin (556). Given that most arrests are for misdemeanor offenses, it is not surprising that some of the counties with the highest (and lowest) total arrest rates also have the highest (and lowest) misdemeanor arrest rates. Among the counties with the highest misdemeanor arrest rates we see Lake (with 5,993 misdemeanor arrests per 100,000 residents), Butte (5,159), Shasta (5,016), Alpine (4,965) and Kern (4,928). The lowest rates are in Contra Costa (1,972), Santa Clara (1,921), Sacramento (1,765), Riverside (1,690) and San Francisco (1,622). FIGURE C1 Most of California’s lowest arrest rates are in the larger counties 9000 8000 7000 6000 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0 Misdemeanor Felony Felony and Misdemeanor Arrest Rates Lake Siskiyou Shasta Trinity Butte Tuolumne Tehama Kern Colusa Alpine Mendocino Santa Barbara Humboldt Kings Del Norte Imperial Tulare Stanislaus Yuba San Luis… Solano Glenn Sierra Modoc Fresno Sonoma Plumas Santa Cruz Sutter Inyo Merced San Bernardino Calaveras Amador Yolo Ventura Napa San Benito Mariposa Madera Monterey Lassen Nevada El Dorado San Diego San Mateo San Joaquin Alameda Marin Orange Placer Contra Costa Mono Los Angeles Sacramento San Francisco Santa Clara Riverside SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents. A closer look at arrest offenses reveals that county differences in felony drug and violent arrest rates contribute prominently to differences in felony arrest rates. For example, the difference in felony drug arrests between the county with the highest rate (Lake, with 496 felony drug arrests per 100,000 residents) and the lowest rate (Marin, with a felony drug arrest rate of 48) of 448 is between one-quarter and one-third of the difference in the overall felony arrest rate between the counties with the highest and lowest felony arrest rate (Table C1). Of roughly the same magnitude is the 510 felony violent arrests per 100,000 residents difference between the counties with the highest rate (Yuba, 690) and the lowest rate (San Mateo, 180). The table also shows great disparity in the felony supervision arrest rate. While differences in misdemeanor drugs arrests also contribute significantly to county differences in misdemeanor arrest rates, differences in arrests for traffic offenses and FTA/warrant play bigger roles. Ranging between 1,210 and 1,471 arrests per 100,000 residents, the highest Misdemeanor-Traffic arrest rates are mostly in small rural counties (Solano, Amador, Tehama, Humboldt, and Lake). The lowest traffic arrest rates—between PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 24 376 and 486—are found in a mix of rural and urban counties (San Benito, Santa Cruz, Contra Costa, Sacramento, and Ventura). The highest misdemeanor arrest rates for FTA/warrants, between 1,164 and 1,586, are also found in California’s small and rural counties: Kings, Butte, Siskiyou, Lake, and Tuolumne. While the absolute lowest rates occur in small rural counties with populations too low to include in our analysis, we see a mix of rural and urban eligible counties among those with the lowest Misdemeanor-FTA/warrant arrest rates: San Benito (181), Sacramento (197), El Dorado (245), Riverside (266), and Marin (271). The distinction between counties with high and low Misdemeanor-Drug arrest rates does not occur so discernibly along the lines of small/rural versus large/urban; the highest rates are found in Kings, Plumas, Lake, Ventura and Tulare while the lowest are in San Francisco, Sierra, Amador, San Joaquin, Trinity and Los Angeles. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 25 TABLE C1 County differences in Felony-Drug and Violent arrest rates contribute prominently to differences in county felony arrest rates High P90 P75 Median P25 P10 Low Property 339 268 221 178 151 128 112 Drugs 496 278 188 108 76 66 48 Violent 690 473 394 326 252 211 180 Felony Arrest Rates Weapons Supervision 140 417 100 119 81 98 59 48 40 26 34 14 23 3 Warrant 239 184 131 79 47 37 11 Other 800 387 249 198 155 114 84 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 227 448 510 139 211 263 70 112 143 117 67 41 414 228 716 105 147 273 72 84 94 High/Low P90/P10 P75/P25 High P90 P75 Median P25 P10 Low 3.03 2.08 1.47 Property 321 256 219 182 162 88 65 10.43 4.18 2.48 Drugs 1,285 944 775 535 421 336 35 3.84 6.12 133.84 2.25 2.99 8.40 1.57 2.03 3.80 Misdemeanor Arrest Rates Assault/Battery Traffic Alcohol 508 1,471 1,146 406 1,204 741 350 1,122 402 253 866 264 210 616 213 151 487 136 124 376 46 21.00 4.91 2.79 FTA/Warrant 1,586 949 669 520 391 292 181 9.55 3.40 1.61 Other 1,311 604 464 368 307 231 179 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 257 1,249 168 608 56 354 385 256 140 1,096 718 506 1,101 605 189 1,405 658 278 1,131 374 157 High/Low 4.98 36.28 4.11 3.92 25.05 8.77 7.30 P90/P10 2.91 2.81 2.69 2.48 5.45 3.25 2.62 P75/P25 1.35 1.84 1.66 1.82 1.89 1.71 1.51 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents in 2016. It is not surprising that the demographic composition of suspects arrested also varies substantially across counties given the overall demographic differences across counties. However, population differences alone are unlikely to be the sole contributor to arrest differences. While a contributing factor to county differences in race/ethnic shares of arrests, demographic compositional differences are likely to have a modest impact on county arrest rate PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 26 differences across gender and age categories as there are relatively small differences in age and gender distributions across counties in California. The counties with the highest female arrest rates tend to also to be the same small rural counties with the state’s highest overall arrest rates. These include Tuolumne (with 4,210 female arrests per 100,000 female residents), Lake (4,130), Siskiyou (3,824), Shasta (3,772) and Butte (3,644). The female arrest rates in the counties with the lowest female arrest rates are roughly ¼ of those in the counties with the highest rates; Los Angeles (1,199), Riverside (1,162), Santa Clara (1,142), Mono (1,046) and San Francisco (982). While across-county differences in arrest rates vary by age group (Table C2), a commonality is that for each age group the arrest rates of the counties in the top decile (the 5-6 counties with the highest arrest rates) are about 2-3 times higher than the arrest rates of the counties in the bottom decile (the 5-6 counties with the lowest arrest rates). For example, the county felony arrest rate for 25-29 year olds in the top decile is 5,341 (roughly corresponding to the Mendocino and Tuolumne rates) is 2.60 times greater than the bottom decile felony arrest rates of 2,053 for this age group (corresponding to the number of felony arrests of 25-29 year olds in San Francisco and San Diego). The disparity across counties is more striking if we look at the difference in these felony arrest rates. There are 3,288 more arrests of 25-29 year olds per 100,000 county residents of that age in the small counties of Mendocino and Tuolumne than in San Francisco or San Diego. We can also discern from Table C2 that the magnitude of the broader differences in arrest rates across counties is to a large extent driven by two age groups, those between 25 and 29 and those between 30 and 39. These are the age groups with the highest arrest rates (for both felony and misdemeanor arrests), and are the age groups with the greatest differences across counties. For example, the top decile misdemeanor arrest rates (roughly the rates of Shasta, Tuolumne or Siskiyou) for these age groups are 13,016 (25-29 year olds) and 11,286 (30-39 year olds). These arrest rates are more than 8,000 misdemeanor arrests per 100,000 residents greater than those in the counties with the bottom decile arrest rates of 5,680 and 3,860 respectively (approximately the rates of Los Angeles and Alameda). TABLE C2 The largest differences in arrest rates across counties are among arrestees between the ages of 25 and 39 Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest 0-17 1,516 1,218 1,080 836 629 530 396 18-24 13,570 11,312 9,342 7,793 6,532 5,732 3,860 Overall Arrest Rates 25-29 30-39 40-49 25,421 21,602 13,331 18,222 15,712 10,246 14,472 11,585 7,742 12,242 9,699 6,288 9,367 6,578 4,181 8,024 5,504 3,451 5,762 3,268 2,934 50-59 7,599 5,767 4,866 3,905 2,842 2,321 1,931 60 or Older 2,017 1,124 947 713 535 468 367 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 1,120 688 452 9,710 5,580 2,809 19,660 10,198 5,104 18,334 10,207 5,007 10,398 6,795 3,562 5,668 3,445 2,023 1,650 656 412 High/Low P90/P10 P75/P25 3.83 3.52 2.30 1.97 1.72 1.43 4.41 2.27 1.54 6.61 2.85 1.76 4.54 3.94 2.97 2.48 1.85 1.71 5.50 2.40 1.77 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 27 Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest 0-17 382 348 310 239 171 149 70 18-24 4,411 3,100 2,648 1,995 1,698 1,491 1,016 25-29 6,998 5,341 3,950 3,037 2,393 2,053 1,508 Felony Arrest Rates 30-39 40-49 7,496 3,790 4,630 2,466 3,398 1,911 2,597 1,291 1,879 1,048 1,372 849 1,133 556 50-59 1,512 1,172 969 700 520 456 326 60 or Older 261 211 148 117 93 72 57 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 312 3,395 5,490 6,363 3,234 1,186 198 1,610 3,288 3,258 1,617 715 140 950 1,556 1,519 863 449 203 139 55 High/Low P90/P10 P75/P25 Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest 5.44 4.34 2.33 2.08 1.82 1.56 0-17 1,224 914 811 568 457 362 259 18-24 10,456 8,501 7,153 5,598 4,629 3,999 2,845 4.64 6.61 6.82 4.64 2.60 3.37 2.90 2.57 1.65 1.81 1.82 1.86 Misdemeanor Arrest Rates 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 18,423 15,031 10,226 6,217 13,016 11,286 7,946 4,727 11,150 8,512 6,340 3,940 8,685 7,276 4,632 2,981 7,097 4,875 3,125 2,232 5,680 3,860 2,409 1,697 3,710 2,018 1,919 1,437 4.55 2.93 1.60 60 or Older 1,920 931 772 542 434 362 302 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 966 7,612 14,714 13,013 8,307 4,780 552 4,502 7,336 7,426 5,537 3,030 354 2,524 4,052 3,637 3,215 1,707 1,618 569 338 High/Low 4.74 3.68 4.97 7.45 5.33 4.33 6.36 P90/P10 2.53 2.13 2.29 2.92 3.30 2.79 2.57 P75/P25 1.77 1.55 1.57 1.75 2.03 1.76 1.78 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents in 2016. As discussed above, arrest rates in California differ dramatically across race/ethnic groups, they also vary significantly across the state’s counties, across these groups (Table C3). The white overall arrest rate in the counties with the highest arrest rates (top decile) is 2.81 times higher than those in the lowest decile, and the difference in overall arrest rates is greater than 4,000 arrest per 100,000 residents. This difference, however, is substantially smaller than the across-county difference in the African American arrest rate. In the top-decile counties in the African American arrest rate is more than 26,000 arrests per 100,000 African American residents, 3.32 times higher than the African American arrest rate in the counties with the lowest rates. For comparison, the PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 28 Latino arrest rate difference between top and bottom-decile counties is about 2,900. It should be pointed out that the highest African American arrest rates are found in small counties, with especially small African American populations. High arrest rates in these cases can be caused by a small number of arrests. However, as Table C4 shows, the greater county difference is evident if we compare the counties in the top quartile of African-American arrest rates to those in the bottom quartile. Furthermore, we observe a number of relatively large counties where the difference between the overall African American arrest rates is at least 10,000 more than the overall white arrest rate: San Mateo, San Francisco, Santa Barbara and Santa Clara. While Latino arrest rates are higher than white arrest rates in California, the data suggest that there are a number of counties where the Latino arrest rate is lower than the white arrest rate. In fact, there are 32 counties where this holds true, including some relatively large counties such as San Bernardino, Sacramento, and San Bernardino. However, there are also a number of large counties where the Latino arrest rate is at least 1,000 more than the white arrest rate: Santa Clara, Fresno, Alameda and Orange County. There are three counties where the Latino arrest rate is twice that of whites (San Mateo, Marin and Santa Clara), and none where it is at least three times that of whites. Table C3 also highlights that the higher African American arrest rates holds for virtually all counties in California. Only two of the smallest counties examined, Lassen and Del Norte, had arrest rates for African Americans that were lower than those of whites. The African American arrest rate was at least double the white arrest rate in 45 of the 49 counties examined, three times greater in 33 counties, four times greater in 21 counties, and five times greater in 13 counties. While some of the greatest disparity is in small rural counties (such as Glenn and Nevada), it also includes urban counties like San Mateo and San Francisco. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 29 TABLE C3 Differences in Felony-Drug and Violent arrest rates contribute prominently to differences in felony arrest rates Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest White 7,704 6,657 5,924 4,033 3,009 2,368 2,046 Overall Arrest Rates African Latino American 6,329 38,710 5,412 26,057 4,978 21,603 4,106 15,152 3,455 9,972 2,499 7,852 354 1,818 Other 10,697 6,336 3,769 1,949 1,545 1,019 789 Group-White Difference African Latino American Other -1,375 31,006 2,993 -1,245 19,399 -321 -945 15,680 -2,155 73 11,119 -2,084 446 6,963 -1,464 131 5,484 -1,349 -1,692 -228 -1,257 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 5,658 4,289 2,915 5,975 2,914 1,523 36,891 18,205 11,631 9,907 5,318 2,224 High/Low P90/P10 P75/P25 Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest 3.8 2.81 1.97 White 2,315 1,710 1,439 934 745 537 335 17.9 21.3 2.17 3.32 1.44 2.17 Felony Arrest Rates African Latino American 2,171 13,620 1,483 8,163 1,201 6,150 926 4,163 816 3,310 744 2,748 42 265 13.5 6.22 2.44 Other 3,404 1,736 1,009 501 366 284 211 Group-White Difference African Latino American Other -143 11,305 1,089 -227 6,453 26 -239 4,711 -430 -9 3,229 -433 72 2,566 -379 207 2,211 -253 -292 -70 -123 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 1,980 1,173 695 2,129 739 384 13,356 5,416 2,840 3,193 1,453 643 High/Low P90/P10 P75/P25 6.9 51.2 3.19 1.99 1.93 1.47 51.5 16.1 2.97 6.13 1.86 2.76 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 30 Highest Top Decile (P90) Top Quartile (P75) Median Bottom Quartile (P25) Bottom Decile (P10) Lowest White 6,030 5,067 4,373 3,056 2,283 1,799 1,540 Misdemeanor Arrest Rates African Latino American 4,749 25,532 4,205 19,486 3,744 15,527 3,041 10,282 2,544 6,606 1,793 4,640 312 979 Other 7,293 4,770 2,722 1,434 1,141 745 578 Group-White Difference African Latino American Other -1,281 19,502 1,263 -862 14,419 -297 -628 11,154 -1,650 -15 7,226 -1,622 260 4,323 -1,143 -6 2,841 -1,054 -1,229 -561 -962 High-Low P90-P10 P75-P25 4,490 3,268 2,089 4,437 2,412 1,201 24,553 14,846 8,921 6,715 4,025 1,582 High/Low 3.9 15.2 26.1 12.6 P90/P10 2.82 2.35 4.20 6.40 P75/P25 1.91 1.47 2.35 2.39 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents in 2016. Examining the 2016 arrest data at the county level makes clear that arrest rates in California vary dramatically across the state. It shows that counties differ widely in the offenses for which suspects are arrested for, as well as the demographics of those arrested. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 31 Appendix D. Other Demographic Analyses TABLE D1 Arrest Rates by Year and Demographic Group Group White 0-17 Female White 0-17 Male White 18-24 Female White 18-24 Male White 25-29 Female White 25-29 Male White 30-39 Female White 30-39 Male White 40-49 Female White 40-49 Male White 50-59 Female White 50-59 Male White 60+ Female White 60+ Male Latino 0-17 Female Latino 0-17 Male Latino 18-24 Female Latino 18-24 Male Latino 25-29 Female Latino 25-29 Male Latino 30-39 Female Latino 30-39 Male Latino 40-49 Female Latino 40-49 Male Latino 50-59 Female Latino 50-59 Male Latino 60+ Female Latino 60+ Male African American 0-17 Female African American 0-17 Male African American 18-24 Female African American 18-24 Male African American 25-29 Female 1980 1,532 6,206 4,362 26,913 2,811 15,736 1,809 10,181 1,269 6,694 643 4,324 167 1,591 1,074 5,964 3,748 39,554 2,674 28,101 1,986 19,588 1,221 14,088 704 10,254 231 4,211 2,465 12,498 12,319 59,795 9,718 1990 1,114 3,557 6,469 28,181 5,817 22,025 3,863 14,585 1,693 7,294 735 3,693 196 1,200 941 4,961 4,457 37,532 4,464 32,017 3,365 24,034 1,763 14,044 703 7,700 243 3,095 2,626 11,339 16,466 68,069 18,559 2000 1,190 3,407 5,292 19,163 3,726 11,835 3,708 10,361 2,138 7,098 638 3,161 108 749 874 3,366 3,444 22,423 2,668 16,294 2,439 12,703 1,642 9,390 614 5,275 133 1,830 2,912 7,653 14,034 47,531 10,399 2010 922 2,097 6,247 15,019 4,858 12,020 3,692 8,910 3,026 7,937 1,210 4,261 175 885 876 2,824 4,471 19,044 4,066 16,517 2,935 11,489 1,928 7,809 862 4,798 162 1,387 2,963 7,385 16,699 40,978 13,094 2016 306 700 3,788 8,335 5,774 13,517 3,999 9,403 2,845 6,689 1,483 4,633 213 940 341 989 2,902 11,638 3,834 14,299 2,806 10,222 1,505 5,994 733 3,832 142 1,171 1,340 3,275 10,762 24,217 12,638 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 32 Group 1980 1990 2000 2010 2016 African American 25-29 Male 54,954 60,436 34,595 38,303 33,733 African American 30-39 Female 5,125 14,219 10,142 9,119 8,683 African American 30-39 Male 40,198 54,440 29,742 28,460 26,515 African American 40-49 Female 2,312 5,349 7,141 6,758 4,773 African American 40-49 Male 24,061 32,203 27,616 22,361 17,287 African American 50-59 Female 1,164 1,446 1,944 3,391 2,901 African American 50-59 Male 16,288 14,066 13,891 16,801 14,538 African American 60+ Female 289 357 248 434 493 African American 60+ Male 6,463 4,960 3,295 3,967 4,213 Other 0-17 Female 682 767 616 422 149 Other 0-17 Male 2,529 3,901 2,005 986 338 Other 18-24 Female 2,358 3,409 1,952 2,430 1,383 Other 18-24 Male 11,685 20,710 8,848 6,811 3,882 Other 25-29 Female 1,765 2,965 1,254 1,877 1,809 Other 25-29 Male 8,768 15,963 5,430 6,155 5,446 Other 30-39 Female 1,288 2,070 1,007 1,149 1,188 Other 30-39 Male 6,396 10,261 4,240 3,939 4,048 Other 40-49 Female 904 1,180 712 800 705 Other 40-49 Male 4,877 5,534 3,077 2,744 2,465 Other 50-59 Female 449 660 329 432 376 Other 50-59 Male 3,463 2,990 1,495 1,587 1,484 Other 60+ Female 175 282 85 109 101 Other 60+ Male 1,339 1,324 529 464 432 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 residents of the relevant demographic group: PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 33 TABLE D2 Overall Arrest Rates, 2016 Age County 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced 525 476 422 1,139 1,299 294 531 683 938 941 570 712 629 285 680 1,351 1,211 917 469 958 1,099 69 1,129 995 6,416 16,667 5,840 7,846 6,011 12,581 7,163 9,342 5,679 7,792 8,864 7,793 9,720 10,242 11,289 8,954 13,570 5,781 5,995 6,777 8,375 5,837 12,788 7,604 7,462 23,913 14,045 15,885 14,671 16,830 9,094 15,235 10,293 12,212 15,929 16,861 13,744 20,546 16,466 12,242 25,421 8,500 7,926 8,333 9,464 12,606 18,298 11,403 5,307 18,391 12,517 16,016 15,044 15,610 6,116 11,585 9,103 9,765 11,153 12,930 12,975 10,075 12,557 10,937 20,808 6,603 5,012 7,671 6,578 11,489 13,881 9,834 3,654 11,905 6,656 10,519 7,441 7,869 3,537 8,902 4,904 6,593 6,711 10,178 7,748 6,656 8,401 8,342 13,331 4,459 3,084 5,006 3,749 8,676 9,522 5,723 2,558 3,465 4,140 6,710 4,004 5,184 2,072 5,690 3,047 3,959 3,987 5,361 4,470 3,889 5,240 4,866 7,599 2,842 2,201 2,884 2,889 3,790 5,729 3,434 584 1,090 535 1,057 638 1,149 416 1,012 595 784 998 974 961 947 1,182 1,158 1,358 713 511 529 713 524 801 800 Gender Female Male 1,480 2,170 2,505 3,644 2,373 2,970 1,405 3,290 1,813 2,226 2,895 2,916 2,493 2,165 3,080 3,153 4,130 2,585 1,199 1,372 1,497 1,935 3,082 2,025 4,660 9,913 5,387 9,177 6,007 9,176 4,535 7,355 4,904 7,129 6,864 8,813 8,300 6,763 9,147 7,651 11,685 4,080 4,441 5,982 4,611 5,550 9,060 6,891 White 2,373 NA 3,731 6,861 4,033 NA 2,553 6,500 3,455 3,698 5,624 6,086 7,206 NA 6,633 4,416 7,704 3,701 2,046 3,017 2,321 NA 6,297 4,416 Race Latino 3,629 NA African American 9,637 NA 4,397 4,343 4,516 NA 8,816 25,038 16,599 NA 2,698 1,491 3,011 5,064 3,521 3,632 5,093 NA 9,751 2,249 15,152 13,352 37,589 26,834 9,972 NA 4,957 5,998 6,329 2,256 3,006 3,852 4,980 NA 16,279 11,869 25,810 1,818 7,955 7,440 14,786 NA 4,430 4,536 32,514 12,246 Other 977 NA 6,331 3,466 4,550 NA 1,013 6,360 1,875 1,935 5,551 4,825 5,376 NA 5,389 3,396 10,697 6,450 922 2,349 1,545 NA 7,443 1,612 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 34 County Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus PPIC.ORG" Age 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ 604 210 841 836 1,245 557 570 1,220 396 463 1,159 700 648 728 950 777 623 1,516 592 820 775 NA 929 1,287 1,137 820 9,524 9,381 7,323 9,075 6,707 7,184 6,923 8,103 5,112 5,054 6,997 7,995 6,532 6,790 5,674 8,367 9,922 10,213 5,745 6,520 11,406 8,494 12,902 9,673 9,169 7,742 23,138 8,686 9,769 9,843 13,532 9,367 10,003 14,004 6,972 8,049 10,570 12,049 8,429 5,762 8,630 14,002 9,711 12,283 7,176 12,861 20,838 17,117 20,958 13,848 13,733 14,472 14,035 4,380 6,427 8,744 9,583 5,658 6,207 12,686 5,387 5,533 9,615 8,674 5,968 3,268 6,946 11,419 6,008 9,207 4,607 10,709 17,083 14,523 21,602 10,894 9,235 11,400 7,136 2,856 4,181 5,002 5,181 3,181 3,820 11,205 2,934 3,590 4,239 5,094 4,360 3,049 4,095 7,742 3,519 7,524 2,980 6,288 11,235 11,327 12,318 6,023 6,785 7,334 4,063 1,741 2,878 3,168 2,814 2,047 2,532 4,248 1,931 2,351 2,895 3,281 3,209 2,409 2,397 4,721 2,654 6,849 2,109 4,262 5,521 6,262 5,918 3,529 4,161 5,114 386 1,036 607 596 511 367 372 773 374 496 485 658 653 461 514 776 571 2,017 470 932 818 651 1,118 593 780 882 Gender Female Male 2,978 1,046 1,758 1,979 1,783 1,334 1,583 2,922 1,162 1,291 1,793 1,963 1,670 982 1,547 2,406 1,430 2,690 1,142 2,047 3,772 2,758 3,824 2,600 2,401 2,534 6,586 4,425 5,204 5,944 5,283 4,638 4,404 6,391 3,809 4,358 6,074 6,571 4,996 4,182 4,949 7,549 5,236 9,023 3,986 7,056 9,680 6,890 9,926 7,233 6,989 7,916 White NA NA 3,182 3,672 3,650 2,833 2,943 NA 2,346 2,628 2,569 4,175 3,009 2,475 3,870 5,021 2,296 5,918 2,189 4,452 7,056 NA 6,437 4,620 4,263 6,047 Race Latino NA NA African American NA NA 3,650 4,063 2,508 3,862 2,929 NA 10,941 22,175 24,286 11,151 17,121 NA 2,460 2,295 4,785 3,946 3,455 354 2,725 4,994 5,029 5,853 4,627 4,772 3,744 NA 5,578 8,305 16,452 8,961 11,799 19,170 8,323 11,726 21,290 19,176 12,504 22,177 33,135 NA 5,846 4,106 5,101 4,289 25,862 12,106 21,942 16,895 Other NA NA 1,731 1,766 1,647 1,240 1,368 NA 1,025 1,020 1,762 1,814 1,556 1,392 1,277 3,033 1,730 3,006 789 2,169 3,769 NA 9,455 1,536 3,134 2,262 Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 35 Age Gender Race County 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ Female Male White Latino African American Sutter 838 8,072 12,617 9,699 6,391 3,905 649 2,424 6,635 5,514 3,889 17,119 Tehama Trinity 1,080 507 10,930 11,538 18,203 28,223 15,636 22,988 8,894 12,287 6,257 3,682 1,149 1,156 3,298 3,292 9,246 9,681 6,755 NA 4,919 NA 38,710 NA Tulare 1,125 10,322 13,404 11,424 7,163 4,185 947 2,535 8,144 5,078 5,322 21,603 Tuolumne 537 11,773 19,489 17,849 10,547 5,050 1,104 4,210 8,288 6,528 5,775 6,667 Ventura 1,042 8,511 11,140 8,235 5,152 2,871 573 1,960 6,108 3,463 4,978 12,345 Yolo 820 3,860 8,474 10,303 6,404 4,451 884 1,949 6,253 4,026 4,029 20,699 Yuba 908 8,576 13,305 10,548 7,503 4,644 928 2,456 7,665 5,924 3,381 16,044 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents of the relevant demographic group. Other 1,949 3,401 NA 3,301 4,374 1,016 1,636 2,479 In California’s largest counties, the age profile of arrest rates generally mirrored that of the state as a whole in 2016, with the highest rates occurring among 25-29 year-olds, and fewer among younger or older age groups. Additionally, rates for the 18-24 and 30-39 year-old ranges were often quite similar. In smaller counties, this pattern frequently varied, often with 30-39 year-olds showing much higher arrest rates than the 18-24 year-olds, and sometimes even posting the highest rates. The gender distribution of arrests in 2016 was somewhat more stable across counties—with few exceptions, large and small counties alike saw a male-tofemale arrest ratio of approximately 3:1. As noted above, the counties with unusually small ratios of female arrestees included urban as well as rural places: Los Angeles, Madera, San Francisco, Alpine, and Mono. By contrast, arrest rates by race/ethnicity vary considerably by county. While African Americans have the highest arrest rates in all but a few small counties, the comparison between Latino and white arrest rates is more complicated. While in the state as a whole, arrest rates among Latinos are 11% higher than those among whites, there are 32 counties where white arrest rates are higher than those for Latinos, and their relative magnitudes exhibit wide variation. The racial groups subsumed under “Other” had the lowest arrest rates for 2016 in most counties, the exceptions generally being rural counties with small populations of those groups—Asians, Pacific Islanders, American Indians, and Alaska Natives among them. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 36 TABLE D3 Felony Arrest Rates, 2016 County Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced 0-17 246 NA 70 239 284 33 166 154 109 242 106 243 156 26 192 382 310 356 210 177 255 35 361 322 18-24 1,832 3,333 1,758 1,313 1,381 3,420 2,687 2,648 1,500 2,194 2,144 1,502 2,989 2,855 2,618 2,481 3,114 2,337 1,858 1,966 1,879 2,502 3,652 1,979 25-29 1,913 4,348 4,551 3,520 4,044 5,811 3,037 3,386 2,784 3,203 4,752 3,772 4,534 6,888 3,469 3,228 6,998 2,411 2,213 2,393 1,849 4,000 5,304 3,073 Age 30-39 1,385 4,598 4,008 3,398 4,176 3,223 2,045 3,029 2,597 2,651 3,320 2,729 4,706 3,409 2,754 2,671 5,777 2,315 1,405 2,237 1,323 3,150 3,466 2,387 Gender Race African 40-49 50-59 60+ Female Male White Latino Other American 876 562 112 326 1,287 486 813 3,297 225 2,381 NA 272 181 2,087 NA NA NA NA 2,226 969 116 721 1,647 1,115 910 3,275 2,989 1,998 1,171 127 566 1,912 1,298 847 6,026 677 2,029 1,023 170 508 1,698 954 1,475 5,668 2,180 1,807 939 113 631 2,272 NA NA NA NA 1,114 562 85 393 1,559 752 871 3,700 314 1,673 961 121 722 1,663 1,440 294 265 1,603 1,291 609 121 395 1,282 846 770 4,722 507 1,482 741 135 422 1,944 843 1,272 4,005 501 1,753 969 209 640 1,978 1,477 978 12,057 1,388 1,634 634 104 464 1,753 1,090 816 5,451 1,133 2,846 1,315 261 670 2,923 2,315 1,714 3,366 1,584 2,166 800 210 541 2,102 NA NA NA NA 1,496 689 123 482 2,005 1,263 1,114 3,755 411 1,911 882 225 641 2,008 931 1,480 3,804 996 3,106 1,382 216 856 2,971 1,674 1,869 6,968 3,404 1,567 835 189 772 1,442 1,303 654 839 1,626 753 472 94 283 1,285 479 827 2,591 241 1,280 771 116 319 1,691 909 968 2,787 583 624 379 70 248 873 366 877 4,483 288 2,140 745 154 447 1,678 NA NA NA NA 2,152 1,154 129 641 2,418 1,539 1,130 8,129 2,216 1,215 660 123 376 1,807 1,088 1,065 3,557 471 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 37 County Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus PPIC.ORG" 0-17 165 35 220 257 346 171 173 344 133 204 233 311 170 362 292 160 166 292 207 252 159 NA 195 335 226 330 18-24 3,139 2,887 1,846 2,300 1,533 1,670 1,870 2,161 1,698 2,046 2,021 2,655 1,545 2,769 1,759 1,132 1,995 1,668 1,549 1,454 3,007 5,019 4,411 2,520 1,940 2,344 25-29 7,447 2,227 2,426 2,054 2,868 2,087 2,906 2,959 2,311 3,101 3,004 3,797 2,053 2,052 2,485 2,209 1,508 2,587 1,848 2,677 5,870 12,613 6,986 3,584 2,583 4,390 Age 30-39 5,482 1,597 1,620 2,227 2,297 1,295 1,879 2,740 1,842 2,099 2,993 2,812 1,535 1,250 1,988 2,032 1,133 1,930 1,222 2,197 4,752 5,809 7,496 2,807 1,828 3,692 Gender Race 40-49 50-59 60+ Female Male White Latino African American Other 2,218 903 161 881 2,280 NA NA NA NA 784 261 214 338 1,206 NA NA NA NA 914 509 70 316 1,319 599 919 3,000 423 1,149 520 113 400 1,448 894 832 6,649 350 1,123 520 77 326 1,233 789 630 6,000 439 662 348 57 266 1,058 550 924 3,170 266 1,048 461 59 385 1,236 770 2,264 809 152 562 1,467 NA 739 NA 6,663 NA 366 NA 873 494 72 313 1,268 674 805 2,081 303 1,233 700 127 389 1,699 834 817 3,718 387 1,040 662 112 447 1,713 737 1,284 4,194 671 1,486 769 140 533 2,141 1,234 1,201 3,320 519 986 634 112 323 1,243 651 811 3,310 381 1,131 793 145 294 1,650 934 42 8,303 412 1,024 534 110 374 1,440 962 745 2,892 372 1,160 476 93 304 1,180 723 790 2,022 495 556 326 68 216 941 335 816 4,925 332 1,183 768 97 397 1,535 822 1,104 4,163 341 703 418 87 263 1,040 477 1,228 3,541 211 1,068 504 117 316 1,442 772 1,072 4,793 335 2,397 4,854 984 3,416 148 244 691 1475 2,657 3,413 1,708 NA 926 NA 11,221 NA 1,047 NA 3,790 1,415 170 938 3,327 1,889 2,171 9,962 3,118 1,391 690 89 513 1,902 1,017 878 3,520 384 1,122 501 79 339 1,345 745 864 5,053 675 2,010 1,174 154 612 2,478 1,674 1,308 5,995 696 Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 38 County Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yolo Yuba 0-17 294 188 231 313 126 240 333 354 18-24 2,356 3,032 3,590 3,097 3,127 1,943 1,016 3,193 25-29 3,950 5,579 12,544 3,945 5,487 2,455 2,233 4,754 Age 30-39 3,222 4,611 10,290 3,448 5,489 1,827 2,858 4,020 Gender Race 40-49 50-59 60+ Female Male White Latino African American Other 1,651 908 118 633 2,034 1,524 1,183 6,836 586 2,047 6,218 1,102 813 241 426 730 1426 2,519 3,928 1,753 NA 1,174 NA 13,620 NA 997 NA 1,867 1,014 181 600 2,434 1,439 1,495 6,802 1,009 2,745 1,167 209 1057 2,327 1,717 1,803 2,828 1,129 974 440 81 346 1,340 615 1,108 3,615 245 1,467 866 112 407 1,688 970 1,061 6,150 374 2,798 1,512 251 746 2,944 2,087 1,319 7,146 756 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents of the relevant demographic group. County-by-county comparisons of felony arrest rates mirror those of overall arrest rates—larger counties typically show 25-29 year-olds with the highest rates, with 18-24 and 30-39 year-olds somewhat lower, and similar to each other. Smaller counties more frequently have 30-39 year-olds with comparatively higher arrest rates, sometimes occupying the top spot among age groups. The male-to-female ratio of felony arrests in 2016 was lower than for all arrests—approximately 4:1—but again was fairly consistent across counties. Latino felony arrest rates, overall higher than those for whites, are nonetheless lower than for whites in 28 of the 58 counties. The “Other” racial grouping posts rather high arrest rates in some, mostly smaller, counties— sometimes even eclipsing those for African Americans, who show the highest overall felony arrest rates. However, this figure is subject to much variation there because of small general populations of the constituent racial groups. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 39 TABLE D4 Misdemeanor Arrest Rates, 2016 Age County 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced 279 476 352 899 1,014 261 365 529 829 700 464 469 472 259 488 969 901 561 259 781 844 35 768 673 4,583 13,333 4,082 6,533 4,629 9,161 4,476 6,694 4,179 5,598 6,720 6,291 6,731 7,387 8,671 6,473 10,456 3,444 4,137 4,811 6,496 3,335 9,136 5,625 5,549 19,565 9,494 12,365 10,627 11,019 6,058 11,850 7,508 9,008 11,177 13,088 9,210 13,658 12,998 9,014 18,423 6,089 5,713 5,939 7,615 8,606 12,993 8,330 3,923 13,793 8,509 12,618 10,868 12,387 4,071 8,556 6,506 7,114 7,833 10,201 8,270 6,667 9,803 8,266 15,031 4,288 3,607 5,435 5,254 8,338 10,415 7,447 2,778 9,524 4,429 8,522 5,412 6,062 2,423 7,229 3,613 5,111 4,958 8,543 4,902 4,490 6,906 6,430 10,226 2,892 2,331 3,725 3,125 6,536 7,370 4,508 1,996 3,465 3,171 5,539 2,981 4,245 1,509 4,729 2,438 3,217 3,018 4,727 3,154 3,090 4,552 3,984 6,217 2,008 1,729 2,114 2,510 3,046 4,574 2,775 60+ 472 817 419 930 468 1,037 331 891 474 650 789 870 700 737 1,059 933 1,142 524 417 413 644 370 671 678 Gender Female Male 1,154 1,989 1,784 3,078 1,864 2,340 1,013 2,568 1,418 1,804 2,255 2,452 1,824 1,624 2,599 2,512 3,275 1,813 916 1,053 1,249 1,488 2,441 1,648 3,373 7,826 3,740 7,265 4,309 6,903 2,976 5,692 3,622 5,184 4,887 7,061 5,377 4,661 7,141 5,642 8,713 2,638 3,155 4,291 3,739 3,872 6,641 5,084 White Latino 1,888 NA 2,615 5,563 3,079 NA 1,800 5,060 2,608 2,855 4,147 4,996 4,892 NA 5,370 3,485 6,030 2,399 1,568 2,108 1,955 NA 4,759 3,328 2,816 NA 3,487 3,496 3,041 NA 1,827 1,197 2,241 3,791 2,544 2,815 3,380 NA 3,843 4,518 4,459 1,602 2,178 2,884 4,103 NA 3,300 3,472 Race African American 6,341 NA 5,542 19,012 10,931 NA 6,050 1,984 10,430 9,347 25,532 21,384 6,606 NA 12,524 8,064 18,842 979 5,364 4,653 10,302 NA 24,386 8,689 Other 751 NA 3,341 2,789 2,370 NA 698 4,757 1,369 1,434 4,163 3,691 3,792 NA 4,977 2,400 7,293 4,824 681 1,765 1,257 NA 5,228 1,141 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 40 County 0-17 Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus 439 175 621 578 899 386 398 876 264 259 926 389 478 366 658 617 457 1,224 385 568 616 NA 734 952 912 490 18-24 6,385 6,495 5,478 6,775 5,174 5,514 5,052 5,942 3,414 3,007 4,977 5,340 4,987 4,020 3,914 7,235 7,927 8,545 4,197 5,066 8,399 3,475 8,491 7,153 7,229 5,398 Age 25-29 30-39 15,691 6,459 7,344 7,789 10,663 7,280 7,097 11,045 4,661 4,948 7,566 8,253 6,376 3,710 6,145 11,793 8,203 9,696 5,328 10,184 14,967 4,505 13,972 10,264 11,150 10,081 8,553 2,783 4,806 6,517 7,287 4,362 4,329 9,946 3,545 3,435 6,622 5,862 4,433 2,018 4,957 9,386 4,875 7,276 3,385 8,512 12,330 8,714 14,106 8,088 7,407 7,708 40-49 4,918 2,072 3,267 3,853 4,057 2,519 2,772 8,942 2,060 2,357 3,200 3,608 3,374 1,919 3,071 6,582 2,963 6,340 2,276 5,220 8,838 6,472 8,528 4,632 5,663 5,324 50-59 3,160 1,480 2,369 2,647 2,293 1,699 2,071 3,439 1,437 1,651 2,232 2,512 2,575 1,617 1,863 4,245 2,329 6,081 1,691 3,758 4,537 2,846 4,503 2,839 3,660 3,940 PPIC.ORG" 60+ 225 822 537 483 434 310 313 621 302 369 373 518 542 316 404 683 503 1,920 382 815 669 407 947 504 701 728 Gender Female Male 2,097 707 1,442 1,578 1,456 1,068 1,199 2,360 848 902 1,346 1,430 1,347 688 1,173 2,102 1,215 2,293 879 1,731 3,081 1,283 2,886 2,086 2,061 1,922 4,307 3,220 3,884 4,496 4,049 3,580 3,168 4,924 2,541 2,659 4,361 4,429 3,753 2,532 3,509 6,369 4,295 7,488 2,946 5,614 7,023 3,477 6,599 5,331 5,644 5,438 White Latino NA NA 2,583 2,778 2,861 2,283 2,173 NA 1,672 1,793 1,832 2,942 2,358 1,540 2,908 4,298 1,961 5,096 1,712 3,680 5,348 NA 4,548 3,603 3,519 4,373 NA NA 2,730 3,231 1,879 2,937 2,190 NA 1,655 1,479 3,500 2,745 2,644 312 1,980 4,204 4,213 4,749 3,399 3,700 2,818 NA 3,675 3,228 4,237 2,981 Race African American NA NA 7,941 15,527 18,286 7,981 10,458 NA 3,497 4,587 12,258 5,641 8,489 10,867 5,431 9,705 16,365 15,013 8,963 17,384 21,914 NA 15,900 8,586 16,889 10,900 Other NA NA 1,308 1,416 1,207 974 1,001 NA 722 632 1,091 1,295 1,176 980 905 2,538 1,398 2,665 578 1,834 2,722 NA 6,337 1,152 2,459 1,566 Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 41 County Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yolo Yuba 0-17 544 893 277 811 412 802 487 554 Age 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 5,716 7,898 7,949 7,225 8,646 6,568 2,845 5,383 8,668 12,624 15,679 9,459 14,002 8,685 6,241 8,550 6,477 11,024 12,697 7,976 12,360 6,408 7,445 6,527 4,739 6,847 6,070 5,296 7,802 4,178 4,938 4,705 2,997 5,155 2,869 3,171 3,882 2,431 3,584 3,132 Gender Race 60+ Female Male White Latino African American 532 1,791 4,600 3,990 2,706 10,282 908 2,568 6,727 5,002 3,744 730 1,866 5,754 NA NA 25,090 NA 766 1,935 5,710 3,639 3,826 14,801 895 3,153 5,960 4,811 3,972 3,838 492 1,614 4,768 2,847 3,870 8,730 772 1,542 4,565 3,056 2,968 14,548 677 1,710 4,722 3,836 2,062 8,898 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register and California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. NOTE: Arrest rates are the number of arrests per 100,000 county residents of the relevant demographic group. Other 1,363 2,404 NA 2,292 3,245 771 1,262 1,723 Overall, 25-29 year-olds have the highest misdemeanor arrest rates, with 6,991 per 100,000 in the population. Second and third are 18-24 year-olds and 30-39 year-olds, respectively. County by county, the pattern is similar to that of felony arrests: larger counties tend to follow that same ranking, while smaller counties often show higher misdemeanor arrest rates among 30-39 year-olds, occasionally even higher than the 25-29 year-olds. Gender ratios for misdemeanor arrests also follow a familiar pattern: larger counties consistently report a male-to-female ratio of about 3:1, with smaller counties clustering around that same figure, albeit with a bit more variation on either side. Similarly, the race/ethnic breakdown generally adheres to the statewide pattern, with the highest misdemeanor arrest rates seen among African-Americans (especially high in more rural counties with fewer African-Americans in the general population), Latinos and whites variously posting the second- or third-highest rates, and “Other” races usually showing the lowest rates (except in small counties with low populations of those constituent minority groups). PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 42 TABLE D5 Shares of Arrest Types by Demographic Groups, 2016 Total Offense Level County Overall Felony Misdemeanor White Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Contra Costa Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced 25% 17% 29% 29% 28% 24% 24% 28% 27% 24% 29% 25% 23% 24% 24% 26% 26% 28% 22% 20% 25% 25% 25% 22% 21% 8% 27% 23% 23% 21% 21% 27% 23% 18% 24% 21% 18% 20% 19% 21% 22% 24% 18% 17% 23% 21% 21% 17% 26% 20% 29% 30% 30% 24% 26% 28% 28% 26% 31% 26% 25% 25% 26% 27% 27% 29% 23% 21% 26% 27% 27% 24% 20% 54% 72% 76% 71% 43% 35% 76% 78% 21% 60% 74% 14% 53% 35% 22% 62% 78% 17% 32% 47% 73% 66% 28% Felony Arrest Shares Latino 24% African American 47% 8% NA 11% 6% 11% 7% 16% 3% 46% 3% 23% 35% 4% 1% 13% 4% 57% 16% 31% 4% 8% 5% 80% 4% 14% 0% 46% 16% 60% 14% 20% 6% 9% 5% 52% 27% 58% 8% 27% 22% 14% 2% 19% 3% 57% 11% Other 9% 38% 11% 5% 9% 8% 7% 19% 5% 5% 5% 12% 2% 33% 2% 5% 12% 9% 5% 3% 5% 11% 12% 4% Misdemeanor Arrest Shares White 28% Latino 29% African American 32% Other 11% 77% 9% 4% 11% 73% 17% 4% 5% 78% 11% 5% 5% 82% 12% 2% 4% 43% 48% 4% 5% 41% 24% 28% 7% 78% 5% 1% 16% 80% 12% 3% 4% 24% 58% 13% 5% 62% 29% 3% 5% 79% 7% 5% 9% 15% 79% 4% 2% 51% 15% 1% 33% 39% 41% 14% 7% 27% 60% 10% 4% 72% 15% 5% 8% 73% 11% 3% 13% 21% 52% 21% 6% 28% 64% 5% 3% 56% 28% 11% 5% 79% 14% 2% 5% 69% 18% 3% 10% 28% 60% 9% 3% PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 43 County Modoc Mono Monterey Napa Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus PPIC.ORG" Total Offense Level Overall Felony Misdemeanor White 31% 17% 24% 25% 26% 23% 27% 31% 24% 23% 23% 23% 25% 19% 24% 23% 22% 23% 22% 22% 29% 28% 28% 27% 26% 25% 28% 20% 18% 22% 21% 20% 24% 28% 20% 19% 21% 20% 20% 15% 21% 20% 19% 20% 20% 18% 21% 30% 22% 21% 21% 20% 33% 16% 26% 26% 27% 23% 28% 32% 25% 26% 24% 25% 26% 21% 25% 24% 23% 23% 23% 24% 31% 27% 31% 28% 27% 26% 68% 54% 22% 51% 86% 35% 72% 83% 32% 37% 24% 27% 38% 40% 35% 66% 24% 38% 24% 50% 83% 84% 69% 32% 57% 46% Felony Arrest Shares Latino African American 13% 1% 29% 4% 64% 9% 32% 13% 8% 3% 49% 7% 13% 11% 3% 4% 48% 16% 18% 37% 71% 2% 48% 22% 35% 19% 1% 43% 34% 24% 24% 5% 37% 21% 53% 7% 51% 13% 42% 5% 5% 6% 10% NA 12% 6% 19% 42% 28% 9% 39% 11% Other 18% 14% 4% 4% 3% 9% 5% 10% 3% 8% 3% 4% 7% 16% 8% 4% 18% 3% 12% 3% 6% 5% 13% 7% 6% 4% Misdemeanor Arrest Shares White Latino African American Other 69% 9% 2% 21% 65% 22% 2% 10% 30% 59% 8% 4% 48% 38% 9% 5% 89% 7% 2% 2% 41% 44% 5% 9% 75% 14% 6% 5% 90% 2% 2% 6% 37% 46% 13% 4% 46% 20% 27% 7% 23% 73% 2% 2% 29% 50% 17% 4% 43% 35% 15% 7% 40% 3% 34% 23% 40% 35% 17% 7% 69% 23% 5% 3% 29% 40% 15% 16% 46% 45% 5% 4% 30% 48% 11% 11% 57% 35% 4% 4% 86% 5% 4% 5% 81% 5% 1% 12% 75% 9% 4% 12% 37% 23% 33% 7% 59% 30% 6% 5% 51% 37% 8% 4% Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 44 County Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Ventura Yolo Yuba Total Offense Level Overall Felony Misdemeanor White 27% 27% 25% 24% 32% 24% 25% 24% 24% 23% 26% 20% 30% 21% 20% 20% 28% 28% 24% 25% 33% 25% 26% 26% 54% 75% 79% 27% 81% 33% 44% 64% Felony Arrest Shares Latino African American 28% 9% 18% 4% 8% 2% 64% 5% 13% 3% 57% 7% 35% 15% 20% 11% SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Justice’s Monthly Arrest and Citation Register, 2016. Other 8% 3% 11% 3% 3% 3% 6% 5% Misdemeanor Arrest Shares White Latino African American Other 59% 27% 6% 8% 74% 20% 2% 3% 89% 4% 1% 6% 27% 65% 5% 3% 84% 10% 2% 4% 41% 52% 4% 2% 48% 33% 12% 7% 68% 18% 8% 7% Table D5 encapsulates some of the trends summarized above, except that the results are not normalized by the underlying population distribution. For example, we observe higher arrest shares of African Americans in counties with higher-than-average underlying populations of African Americans, e.g., Alameda, Solano, and Sacramento. However, these shares are still disproportionate to the underlying population. Furthermore, we also witness high shares in counties with lower-than-average underlying populations of African Americans, for instance, San Francisco, Yolo, and Marin. The Latino shares of arrests also track with counties’ Latino populations, with the highest shares being found in counties such as Imperial, San Benito, and the counties of the San Joaquin Valley. Again, though, these percentages are disproportionate to the underlying population shares. These disparities hold for felony as well as misdemeanor arrest shares. Since gender distributions vary less by county than do race/ethnicity distributions, we see less variation in the gender shares of arrests. What variation does appear might suggest more about each county’s conditions (crime rates, law enforcement staffing, policing practices, political priorities) than about its underlying population. Generally, the female share of arrests hovers around 25%, and generally, it’s slightly higher for misdemeanors than for felonies. But some exceptions emerge, for instance, women make up about 1/3 of all arrests in the three counties with the highest female shares of arrests: Tuolumne (32 percent), Plumas (31 percent), and Modoc (31 percent). However, we also see some small counties among those with the lowest arrest shares for women; Alpine (17 percent), Mono (17 percent), San Francisco (19 percent), and Madera (20 percent). It should be noted that the pattern that the highest female shares of arrests tend to be small rural counties holds for both felony arrests and misdemeanors. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 45 Appendix E. Data and Methods Data Arrest Data The California Department of Justice (CA DOJ) Criminal Justice Statistics Center (CJSC) collects information on arrests and citations. This arrest and citation data is reported monthly by law enforcement agencies (LEAs) throughout the state and put together into the Monthly Arrest and Citation Register (MACR) dataset. The CA DOJ has statutory authority to collect arrest data pursuant to Penal Code Sections 13010-13012 and 13020-13021. Arrest data provide information on felony and misdemeanor level arrests, along with status offenses (e.g., truancy, incorrigibility, running away, and curfew violations) for juveniles. Arrest data include individual-level information on the nature of the arrest such as the date it occurred and which county it occurred within, along with the most serious offense the suspect was arrested for, and the final outcome of the arrest. The data also contain person-level information on the arrestee including his or her name, age, gender, and race/ethnic group. The data used for this report are confidential and PPIC is unable to share this data outside of its research team. However, the CA DOJ has created the OpenJustice website (https://openjustice.doj.ca.gov/) to make available a wide range of criminal justice data. The website contains publicly available data, data manuals, and annual reports conducted by the CA DOJ. Population Data The California Department of Finance (CA DOF), Demographics and Research Unit, is tasked with publishing the state’s official annual population estimates at the state, county and city levels. These estimates are benchmarked on the decennial census’ population statistics, and then utilize a variety of state administrative sources to estimate changes during the intercensal years. For the years 1980-2010, we make use of the E-7 Annual Intercensal Population Estimates by Race/Ethnicity with Age and Gender Detail estimate tables, available for download on the DOF website (http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Estimates/). For the years 2011-2016, we utilize DOF’s demographic projections from the P-3 State and County Projections Dataset (http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasting/Demographics/Projections/). In their standard formats, these datasets contain the year of observation, the long form of the county of observation’s geographically identifying FIPS code, and the number of people within a county by gender, race/ethnicity, and age. The available race/ethnicity categories available for all years of the data are White, African American, American Indian, Asian/Pacific Islander, and Hispanic. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 46 TABLE E1 1980-2016 State Population Overall, by Gender, by Age, and Race/Ethnicity Year 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Total Gender Age Race Total Female Male 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ White Latino African American Other 23,780,068 24,277,674 24,805,011 25,336,301 25,816,294 26,402,633 27,052,291 27,716,860 28,393,094 29,142,106 29,828,238 30,458,186 30,987,427 31,313,074 31,523,075 31,711,003 31,962,164 32,451,807 32,862,213 33,418,384 34,000,835 34,512,742 34,938,290 35,388,928 35,752,765 35,985,582 36,246,822 36,552,529 36,856,222 12,057,299 12,284,160 12,529,398 12,776,467 12,997,526 13,271,959 13,578,094 13,891,742 14,211,394 14,568,118 14,927,384 15,246,102 15,515,174 15,683,178 15,794,686 15,895,710 16,028,140 16,280,567 16,494,716 16,774,907 17,079,605 17,339,700 17,554,666 17,782,868 17,968,347 18,087,299 18,219,378 18,372,905 18,525,551 11,722,769 11,993,514 12,275,613 12,559,834 12,818,768 13,130,674 13,474,197 13,825,118 14,181,700 14,573,988 14,900,854 15,212,084 15,472,253 15,629,896 15,728,389 15,815,293 15,934,024 16,171,240 16,367,497 16,643,477 16,921,230 17,173,042 17,383,624 17,606,060 17,784,418 17,898,283 18,027,444 18,179,624 18,330,671 6,430,341 6,592,378 6,725,511 6,856,643 6,969,874 7,117,459 7,283,296 7,426,616 7,549,923 7,677,877 7,962,679 8,296,128 8,592,252 8,778,558 8,907,166 8,993,180 9,067,742 9,175,041 9,203,676 9,243,483 9,226,715 9,351,040 9,439,641 9,522,125 9,559,942 9,551,284 9,550,173 9,549,093 9,525,912 3,269,218 3,321,549 3,367,303 3,405,287 3,430,320 3,439,613 3,425,434 3,461,716 3,482,135 3,512,200 3,472,993 3,418,466 3,373,866 3,334,926 3,286,864 3,223,197 3,191,883 3,227,975 3,287,125 3,355,265 3,403,068 3,480,653 3,547,272 3,630,339 3,704,139 3,750,160 3,777,042 3,812,497 3,843,861 2,244,431 2,303,765 2,383,900 2,442,840 2,493,891 2,556,257 2,636,108 2,690,961 2,763,505 2,838,290 2,837,441 2,784,777 2,737,839 2,669,016 2,612,055 2,590,150 2,596,454 2,613,088 2,620,681 2,606,037 2,582,530 2,536,097 2,509,602 2,506,589 2,517,332 2,530,079 2,568,339 2,618,394 2,672,698 3,579,339 3,745,958 3,904,765 4,054,736 4,207,905 4,395,464 4,613,723 4,762,914 4,930,017 5,124,519 5,300,083 5,415,152 5,493,693 5,525,546 5,526,757 5,503,157 5,470,351 5,470,450 5,459,962 5,488,555 5,544,515 5,547,256 5,504,832 5,453,867 5,381,900 5,301,469 5,253,382 5,231,468 5,223,989 2,437,202 2,470,933 2,533,456 2,635,208 2,736,466 2,846,102 2,959,572 3,153,096 3,345,685 3,538,297 3,746,241 3,915,926 4,061,431 4,178,176 4,288,988 4,417,608 4,549,788 4,650,213 4,751,804 4,872,116 5,019,549 5,140,349 5,244,640 5,334,166 5,401,896 5,430,150 5,433,066 5,420,042 5,399,525 2,405,603 2,379,154 2,341,796 2,315,387 2,282,492 2,270,019 2,270,857 2,282,563 2,306,864 2,354,155 2,394,736 2,440,791 2,497,553 2,572,229 2,639,481 2,703,789 2,780,788 2,950,133 3,111,476 3,279,088 3,499,221 3,651,614 3,794,609 3,932,849 4,071,512 4,209,375 4,344,213 4,463,785 4,554,904 3,413,934 3,463,937 3,548,280 3,626,200 3,695,346 3,777,719 3,863,301 3,938,994 4,014,965 4,096,768 4,114,065 4,186,946 4,230,793 4,254,623 4,261,764 4,279,922 4,305,158 4,364,907 4,427,489 4,573,840 4,725,236 4,805,733 4,897,695 5,008,993 5,116,044 5,213,066 5,320,607 5,457,250 5,635,333 15,949,865 15,988,809 16,039,332 16,092,416 16,118,779 16,216,876 16,351,870 16,504,967 16,674,150 16,886,542 17,023,540 17,058,054 17,017,989 16,872,297 16,662,922 16,451,132 16,273,751 16,218,350 16,115,115 16,083,291 15,869,494 15,873,181 15,866,488 15,854,432 15,814,212 15,716,066 15,625,359 15,556,795 15,487,390 4,615,231 4,905,823 5,206,814 5,508,671 5,795,931 6,103,662 6,428,436 6,754,398 7,077,579 7,419,574 7,760,408 8,144,055 8,510,544 8,812,620 9,084,479 9,345,976 9,619,410 9,963,894 10,287,317 10,660,337 11,131,841 11,481,484 11,787,393 12,116,017 12,413,958 12,667,790 12,923,558 13,185,607 13,443,156 1,793,663 1,815,312 1,843,132 1,870,686 1,893,386 1,923,209 1,958,844 1,992,361 2,024,779 2,061,823 2,106,034 2,142,583 2,173,357 2,188,642 2,197,114 2,201,855 2,212,935 2,241,770 2,266,640 2,302,375 2,195,808 2,210,103 2,218,543 2,225,966 2,227,246 2,220,269 2,216,691 2,216,181 2,217,102 1,421,309 1,567,730 1,715,733 1,864,528 2,008,198 2,158,886 2,313,141 2,465,134 2,616,586 2,774,167 2,938,256 3,113,494 3,285,537 3,439,515 3,578,560 3,712,040 3,856,068 4,027,793 4,193,141 4,372,381 4,803,691 4,947,973 5,065,866 5,192,513 5,297,349 5,381,456 5,481,214 5,593,946 5,708,574 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 47 Total Gender Age Race Year Total Female Male 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 40-49 50-59 60+ White Latino African American Other 2009 37,077,204 18,632,980 18,444,224 9,307,822 3,878,334 2,725,038 5,163,197 5,328,628 2010 37,335,085 18,775,428 18,559,657 9,283,438 3,928,347 2,744,738 5,150,208 5,299,045 2011 37,675,500 18,941,910 18,733,590 9,281,575 3,984,075 2,711,916 5,159,273 5,290,881 2012 38,042,760 19,126,608 18,916,152 9,283,191 4,040,538 2,663,566 5,205,998 5,273,176 2013 38,373,749 19,289,906 19,083,843 9,282,818 4,096,477 2,605,330 5,261,870 5,236,169 2014 38,739,792 19,467,456 19,272,336 9,272,748 4,166,987 2,555,931 5,318,812 5,202,887 2015 39,059,415 19,626,015 19,433,400 9,263,507 4,204,875 2,521,019 5,346,222 5,179,027 2016 39,312,207 19,749,757 19,562,450 9,257,380 4,223,279 2,525,971 5,352,282 5,158,070 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016 . 4,710,736 4,791,771 4,892,470 4,982,072 5,053,693 5,116,219 5,148,581 5,136,348 5,963,449 6,137,538 6,355,310 6,594,219 6,837,392 7,106,208 7,396,184 7,658,877 15,251,448 15,046,338 15,031,386 15,036,764 15,021,846 15,030,890 15,017,676 14,977,798 13,792,550 14,059,187 14,311,416 14,562,186 14,795,885 15,032,537 15,254,730 15,455,506 2,205,579 2,187,491 2,197,337 2,207,132 2,218,247 2,232,359 2,239,134 2,242,413 5,827,627 6,042,069 6,135,361 6,236,678 6,337,771 6,444,006 6,547,875 6,636,490 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 48 TABLE E2 2016 County Population Overall, by Gender, by Age, and Race/Ethnicity Overall Gender Age County Alameda Alpine Amador Butte Calaveras Colusa Population 1,637,176 1,128 37,181 224,761 44,747 22,428 Female 832,826 553 17,207 113,058 22,422 10,941 Male 804,350 575 19,974 111,703 22,325 11,487 0-17 349,269 210 5,689 46,365 7,393 6,130 18-24 25-29 30-39 166,950 90 3,185 35,037 4,126 2,456 114,916 46 1,780 14,945 1,929 1,325 243,078 87 3,643 25,044 3,616 2,761 40-49 228,534 126 4,312 23,376 4,287 2,656 50-59 218,411 202 5,677 24,844 6,943 2,662 60+ 316,018 367 12,895 55,150 16,453 4,438 White 542,669 840 29,405 163,216 36,898 8,151 Race Latino 379,834 52 5,276 African American 186,639 794 36,818 5,492 13,560 3,319 247 110 Other 528,034 236 1,706 21,408 2,110 607 Contra Costa 1,129,332 577,313 552,019 252,258 95,089 65,371 149,787 153,597 165,625 247,605 508,511 291,222 102,671 226,928 Del Norte El Dorado Fresno Glenn Humboldt Imperial Inyo Kern Kings Lake Lassen Los Angeles Madera Marin Mariposa Mendocino Merced Modoc Mono Monterey Napa 26,956 184,085 988,072 29,084 135,884 186,520 18,658 887,922 149,172 64,712 30,599 10,215,103 155,518 262,706 18,057 88,779 272,286 9,506 13,801 439,945 141,569 12,463 91,654 494,284 14,370 67,704 91,855 9,239 432,709 67,753 32,371 11,530 5,169,749 80,241 133,112 8,940 44,285 134,985 4,769 6,502 213,995 70,912 14,493 92,431 493,788 14,714 68,180 94,665 9,419 455,213 81,419 32,341 19,069 5,045,354 75,277 129,594 9,117 44,494 137,301 4,737 7,299 225,950 70,657 5,857 36,677 280,673 7,543 27,946 54,402 3,865 255,253 45,526 13,538 5,343 2,319,464 42,402 52,858 2,886 19,134 80,372 1,821 2,859 115,112 29,907 2,644 18,067 124,156 3,125 16,707 21,214 1,611 107,906 17,411 5,652 3,252 1,120,426 17,190 17,719 1,559 7,476 34,915 924 970 48,488 13,565 1,595 9,230 65,494 1,852 8,244 13,322 842 62,588 12,114 3,501 2,447 668,016 11,197 10,979 825 4,864 17,863 376 898 28,406 8,910 3,401 17,829 130,957 3,434 18,066 23,121 1,995 120,056 22,127 6,786 4,104 1,439,155 20,075 25,617 1,619 10,792 35,896 912 2,192 61,896 17,693 2,988 20,839 112,623 3,308 14,807 21,399 1,893 103,553 15,800 6,826 4,149 1,412,388 18,199 39,101 1,729 10,271 31,611 1,037 1,786 54,921 17,313 3,849 30,392 110,999 3,612 17,347 21,209 2,751 102,248 14,859 9,409 4,433 1,344,187 17,127 40,598 2,955 11,521 30,020 1,329 2,298 50,908 19,793 6,622 51,051 163,170 6,210 32,767 31,853 5,701 136,318 21,335 19,000 6,871 1,911,467 29,328 75,834 6,484 24,721 41,609 3,107 2,798 80,214 34,388 17,570 143,416 295,620 15,577 102,644 20,954 11,778 314,084 48,002 46,054 21,804 2,740,584 53,330 186,696 15,162 58,230 76,829 7,474 9,276 135,711 74,833 4,762 25,440 524,336 12,069 15,310 157,448 4,428 467,231 83,663 13,320 4,743 4,975,042 91,054 44,240 1,839 22,483 160,015 1,441 4,000 255,388 49,867 756 1,419 47,867 141 1,431 3,951 76 48,020 7,465 1,019 2,145 815,775 4,449 7,115 111 529 9,138 69 11 11,233 2,602 3,868 13,810 120,249 1,297 16,499 4,167 2,376 58,587 10,042 4,319 1,907 1,683,702 6,685 24,655 945 7,537 26,304 522 514 37,613 14,267 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 49 County Nevada Orange Placer Plumas Riverside Sacramento San Benito San Bernardino San Diego San Francisco San Joaquin San Luis Obispo San Mateo Santa Barbara Santa Clara Santa Cruz Shasta Sierra Siskiyou Solano Sonoma Stanislaus Sutter Tehama Trinity Tulare Tuolumne Overall Population 98,300 3,179,122 375,805 19,535 2,359,588 1,503,536 58,010 2,143,578 3,295,816 872,463 738,343 278,080 768,507 447,309 1,932,827 275,754 177,631 3,141 44,373 433,412 503,152 543,592 98,208 64,158 13,492 467,960 54,291 Gender Female Male 0-17 49,649 1,602,227 191,381 9,787 1,185,845 765,227 29,051 48,651 1,576,895 184,424 9,748 1,173,743 738,309 28,959 1,078,446 1,065,132 1,639,394 1,656,422 16,468 730,547 78,193 3,197 601,433 361,947 14,580 580,699 790,021 430,647 441,816 126,208 369,778 368,565 200,036 135,915 142,165 51,859 389,691 378,816 161,878 221,860 225,449 103,069 958,238 137,835 90,433 1,559 22,280 217,615 255,502 274,078 49,298 32,318 6,592 233,615 26,105 974,589 137,919 87,198 1,582 22,093 215,797 247,650 269,514 48,910 31,840 6,900 234,345 28,186 446,411 60,233 37,816 465 8,719 100,543 99,716 145,153 25,173 15,456 2,169 144,319 8,748 Age 18-24 25-29 30-39 8,871 338,460 30,581 1,666 260,072 169,221 6,631 250,211 359,098 4,567 185,693 20,134 1,014 157,488 91,514 3,595 146,549 221,520 9,579 409,743 48,813 1,679 291,744 208,115 6,916 284,444 455,372 65,142 65,399 185,138 82,467 49,338 92,836 36,571 17,697 30,704 55,783 45,884 107,026 63,862 29,570 57,654 173,761 38,653 16,597 259 3,922 44,608 46,603 66,304 10,270 6,432 1,170 49,661 4,765 114,318 15,426 10,817 111 2,233 27,485 27,875 33,825 6,507 3,818 574 32,066 3,171 288,409 31,721 20,559 241 4,282 54,689 66,074 70,262 12,568 7,048 1,205 63,378 5,793 40-49 10,327 447,102 48,271 1,767 295,593 193,081 7,407 268,499 415,383 132,186 91,774 28,713 115,468 50,454 282,807 32,127 18,986 309 4,327 53,109 60,251 65,364 11,689 6,937 1,351 54,529 5,537 50-59 14,608 440,830 52,969 2,966 296,636 195,635 8,153 268,280 418,833 109,866 94,321 36,982 110,530 54,036 262,372 36,885 24,905 527 6,218 60,867 72,081 66,683 12,445 8,710 2,091 50,614 7,624 60+ 33,880 626,747 96,844 7,246 456,622 284,023 10,728 344,896 635,589 White 83,388 1,333,112 280,911 16,438 885,034 686,814 20,747 Race Latino African American 10,007 350 1,106,884 48,704 51,698 4,953 1,870 151 1,118,643 143,943 351,365 153,640 34,569 310 626,143 1,131,542 186,915 1,527,127 1,124,549 149,376 Other 4,555 690,422 38,243 1,076 211,968 311,717 2,384 198,978 494,764 188,524 366,988 131,924 44,767 328,784 127,571 240,356 305,730 54,945 137,312 75,554 192,142 63,898 5,688 16,352 171,938 315,080 199,476 19,169 234,782 88,664 198,666 208,072 7,134 33,437 364,749 60,709 47,951 1,229 14,672 92,111 130,552 96,001 19,556 15,757 4,932 73,393 18,653 641,453 158,115 143,472 2,813 34,518 166,792 323,689 231,716 46,388 44,204 11,246 134,776 43,920 528,556 94,895 17,069 237 5,388 113,892 134,058 249,808 31,116 16,264 1,190 303,803 6,546 44,985 2,462 1,515 3 522 61,854 7,342 14,679 1,770 279 47 5,601 990 717,833 20,282 15,575 88 3,945 90,874 38,063 47,389 18,934 3,411 1,009 23,780 2,835 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 50 Overall Gender Age County Population Female Male 0-17 18-24 25-29 30-39 Ventura 853,673 428,739 424,934 200,204 88,126 53,574 105,963 Yolo 216,726 111,126 105,600 49,888 43,521 15,223 24,216 Yuba 76,138 37,784 38,354 21,480 8,081 5,111 10,372 SOURCE: Author calculation based on California Department of Finance Population Data, 1980–2016. 40-49 108,740 23,796 8,757 50-59 120,731 23,547 9,195 60+ 176,335 36,535 13,142 White 390,465 102,515 43,452 Race Latino African American 368,074 13,666 73,013 5,382 20,997 2,169 Other 81,468 35,816 9,520 PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 51 Methods Data Standardization Because the variable coding schemes change periodically, we first standardized the codes across years. We began by collapsing the race variable into fewer and larger demographic groups to streamline the analysis. The new race/ethnic groups are White, Latino, African American, and Other. Next, we sorted the age variable into age ranges with the cut points set according to an age group’s frequency in the data. Our age groups are 0-17 (juveniles), 18-24, 25-29, 30-39, 40-49, 50-59, and 60 or over. Additionally, for convenience, we disaggregated offenses coded as “Other Felonies” and “Other Misdemeanors” and create labeled string variables for the gender, offense level, summary offense, type of status, and county variables. Finally, to avoid small sample sizes in the analysis, we created our own aggregated version of the summary offense variable. Our variable comprises violent felonies (Felony-Violent), property felonies (Felony-Property), drug felonies (Felony-Drugs), weapons felonies (Felony-Weapons), warrant felonies (Felony-Warrant), supervision felonies (Felony-Supervision), other felonies (Felony-Other), misdemeanor assault (MisdemeanorAssault/Battery), drug misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-Drugs), alcohol misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-Alcohol), traffic misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-Traffic), property misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-Property), failure to appear or warrant misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-FTA/Warrant), other misdemeanors (Misdemeanor-Other), and status offenses. Arrest Offense Categories Our arrest groups are each composed of several offenses, labeled according to the California Codes. Here we define and elaborate on what some of the more common offense codes entail. The most common offense types for the Felony – Drug category were Narcotics, Dangerous Drugs, and Marijuana. Narcotics are classified as controlled substances having the highest potential for abuse, while Dangerous Drugs are classified as one tier lower. Any offense involving narcotics is a felony, while sale or manufacture of dangerous drugs is a felony, but possession is a misdemeanor. A marijuana offense is a felony in California in the most extreme cases, such as sale to a minor or illegal cultivation for sale. The Felony – Property and Felony – Violent categories are largely intuitive except we will note that Theft rises from a misdemeanor to a felony when the total value of stolen goods exceeds $950, and that Lewd or Lascivious typically refers to the sexual abuse of a minor. Among the Felony – Other category, Driving Under the Influence is typically a misdemeanor but may rise to a felony when one has been repeatedly arrested for this offense, or if someone is seriously injured or killed in the course of a DUI. Additionally, Malicious Mischief entails the destruction or vandalism of another’s property, while Other Felonies refers to a broad range of offenses from violations of the Business and Professions Code to treason. Turning to the misdemeanor offenses, the Misdemeanor – Alcohol category is likely self-evident with the exception of Disturbing the Peace which constitutes a broad range of conduct from inciting a riot to interrupting a session of the Legislature. Misdemeanor – FTA/Warrant offenses refer to those in which an arraigned arrestee did not appear in court as ordered (Failed to Appear), and for those misdemeanors that required a warrant to facilitate the arrest. For Misdemeanor – Drugs, Other Drug Law Violations typically refer to drug related offenses such as illicit possession of syringes, or falsifying a prescription. Misdemeanor Marijuana offenses include acts like smaller scale cultivation without a license or not paying sales taxes on a marijuana transaction. The Misdemeanor PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 52 – Other category is similar to its Felony counterpart, except CI/CO ordinances refer to violations of laws passed by local governments (cities and counties) such as noise ordinances. Lastly, within Misdemeanor – Traffic, Select Traffic refers specifically to Reckless Driving or refusing to comply with a ticket, while Miscellaneous Traffic refers to a long list of other violations of the Vehicle Code. Arrest Rate Calculation We calculated arrest rates for our demographic groups, using our aggregated arrest types at the state and county levels. To do so we first created separate tables at the state and county levels, tallying raw arrest counts by race, age group, gender, and a full disaggregation making use of all three demographic variables. We then merged these arrest counts with California Department of Finance’s demographic and population estimates for the state and its counties. These population data were coded to merge cleanly onto our demographic characteristics. Finally, to calculate arrest rates, we divided the number of persons arrested of a specific demography by the total number of persons of that demography in the state or county, and multiply the quotient by 100,000. We also created separate tables calculating arrest rates by offense level, and identified the five most commonly arrested felonies and misdemeanors for each year of our data. One key difference between our reporting of the data and the annual CJSC Crime in California reports, is the CJSC calculations omit Federal Offenses, Miscellaneous Traffic Offenses, Felony and Misdemeanor Supervision Violations, and Outside of Warrant Misdemeanors and Felonies. We included all offense types in our arrest totals to present a comprehensive view of Californians’ interactions with law enforcement each year. PPIC.ORG" Technical Appendices New Insights into California Arrests 53 The Public Policy Institute of California is dedicated to informing and improving public policy in California through independent, objective, nonpartisan research. Public Policy Institute of California 500 Washington Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94111 T: 415.291.4400 F: 415.291.4401 PPIC.ORG PPIC Sacramento Center Senator Office Building 1121 L Street, Suite 801 Sacramento, CA 95814 T: 916.440.1120 F: 916.440.1121"
["post_date_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2018-12-04 04:02:26"
["comment_status"]=>
string(6) "closed"
["ping_status"]=>
string(6) "closed"
["post_password"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_name"]=>
string(16) "1218mlr-appendix"
["to_ping"]=>
string(0) ""
["pinged"]=>
string(0) ""
["post_modified"]=>
string(19) "2018-12-03 20:02:43"
["post_modified_gmt"]=>
string(19) "2018-12-04 04:02:43"
["post_content_filtered"]=>
string(0) ""
["guid"]=>
string(60) "https://www.ppic.org/wp-content/uploads/1218mlr-appendix.pdf"
["menu_order"]=>
int(0)
["post_mime_type"]=>
string(15) "application/pdf"
["comment_count"]=>
string(1) "0"
["filter"]=>
string(3) "raw"
["status"]=>
string(7) "inherit"
["attachment_authors"]=>
bool(false)
}