We are happy to discharge our obligation to thank the many individuals who contributed to the ideas developed in this study. First and foremost, we offer our appreciation to key individuals in the nine trial court systems. Their participation and cooperation enabled us to gather needed information. Without them, there would be no study. Hence, we gratefully acknowledge the following individuals:

No abstract

No abstract

Virginia has abolished parole and adopted truth-in-sentencing guidelines for persons convicted of felonies. As part of this reform, the Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission developed a method for diverting 25% of nonviolent, prison-bound offenders into alternative sanction programs using risk assessment to identify the lowest risk offenders. This article describes an evaluation of the effectiveness of this instrument, used by judges at the time of sentencing. It serves to advance an understanding of the factors associated with recidivism and the policy implications of using risk assessment to divert offenders from incarceration at a time when states are facing fiscal challenges.

We analyze thousands of trials from a substantial fraction of the nation's most populous counties. Evidence across 10 years and three major data sets suggests that: (1) juries and judges award punitive damages in approximately the same ratio to compensatory damages, (2) the level of punitive damages awards has not increased, and (3) juries' and judges' tendencies to award punitive damages differ in bodily injury and no‐bodily‐injury cases. Jury trials are associated with a greater rate of punitive damages awards in financial injury cases. Judge trials are associated with a greater rate of punitive damages awards in bodily injury cases.