CAPITAL PUNISHMENT IN THE UNITED STATES, 1973-2018 provides annual data on prisoners under a sentence of death, as well as those who had their sentences commuted or vacated and prisoners who were executed. This study examines basic sociodemographic classifications including age, sex, race and ethnicity, marital status at time of imprisonment, level of education, and state and region of incarceration. Criminal history information includes prior felony convictions and prior convictions for criminal homicide and the legal status at the time of the capital offense. Additional information is provided on those inmates removed from death row by yearend 2018. The dataset consists of one part which contains 9,583 cases. The file provides information on inmates whose death sentences were removed in addition to information on those inmates who were executed. The file also gives information about inmates who received a second death sentence by yearend 2018 as well as inmates who were already on death row.

Investigator(s): Bureau of Justice Statistics These data collections provide annual data on prisoners under a sentence of death and on those whose offense sentences were commuted or vacated during the years indicated. Information is supplied for basic sociodemographic characteristics such as age, sex, race, ethnicity, marital status at time of imprisonment, level of education, and state of incarceration. Criminal history data include prior felony convictions for criminal homicide and legal status at the time of the capital offense. Additional information is available for inmates removed from death row by yearend of the last year indicated and for inmates who were executed. The universe is all inmates on death row since 1972 in the United States. The inmate identification numbers were assigned by the Bureau of the Census and have no purpose outside these data collections.Years Produced: Annually (latest release contains all years)NACJD has produced a resource guide on the Capital Punishment in the United States Series.

The Death Penalty Census displays death sentences imposed between the Supreme Court’s issuance of the Furman v. Georgia ruling in 1972 and January 1, 2022. Each row in the database below represents a death sentence. You can search death sentences by the name of the defendant sentenced or filter the sentences in various ways. For helpful tips on searching, scroll below the database table. Because of the complex legal processes involved in death-penalty cases, we encourage you to review the Death Penalty Census Codebook, which provides an in-depth explanation of how to interpret sentencing information in the database.

Acknowlegement

Foto von Tingey Injury Law Firm auf Unsplash

Our publication covers movements in the death row population in India as well as political and legal developments in the administration of the death penalty and the criminal justice system. The statistics are compiled through a combination of processes such as data mining of court websites, media monitoring and Right to Information applications.

This pre-analysis plan outlines a research strategy to test a "self-reinforcing" theory of death penalty executions, which holds that counties face decreasing marginal costs for executions. We test this theory through examining event dependence in executions among counties that have the death penalty. To test for the presence of these self-reinforcing processes in executions, and the exogenous factors that may explain executions, we utilize an event history model that accounts for event dependence. The empirical findings of this analysis may have profound consequences for how we understand executions. Evidence of event dependence would reveal that the main determinant of whether an individual is executed is the county's previous experience with execution, which would raise many important policy, legal, and moral questions.

1. Context

Capital punishment is one of the controversial human rights issues in the United States. While surfing the Internet for an interesting dataset, I came across this database by Texas Department of Criminal Justice, which comprises of the offenders' last words before execution. Some of the statements are:

"...Young people, listen to your parents; always do what they tell you to do, go to school, learn from your mistakes. Be careful before you sign anything with your name. Never, despite what other people say..." (Ramiro Hernandez, executed on April 9th, 2014)

"First and foremost I'd like to say, "Justice has never advanced by taking a life" by Coretta Scott King. Lastly, to my wife and to my kids, I love y'all forever and always. That's it." (Taichin Preyor, executed on July 27th, 2017)

As I skimmed these lines, I decided to create this dataset.

2. Content

This dataset includes information on criminals executed by Texas Department of Criminal Justice from 1982 to November 8th, 2017. In Furman v Georgia in 1972, the Supreme Court considered a group of consolidated cases, whereby it severely restricted the death penalty. However, like other states, Texas adjusted its legislation to address the Court's concern and once again allow for capital punishment in 1973. Texas adopted execution by lethal injection in 1977 and in 1982, the starting year of this dataset, the first offender was executed by this method.

The dataset consists of 545 observations with 21 variables. They are:
- Execution: The order of execution, numeric.
- LastName: Last name of the offender, character.
- FirstName: First name of the offender, character.
- TDCJNumber: TDCJ Number of the offender, numeric.
- Age: Age of the offender, numeric.
- Race: Race of the offender, categorical : Black, Hispanic, White, Other.
- CountyOfConviction: County of conviction, character.
- AgeWhenReceived: Age of offender when received, numeric.
- EducationLevel: Education level of offender, numeric.
- Native County: Native county of offender, categorical : 0 = Within Texas, 1= Outside Texas.
- PreviousCrime : Whether the offender committed any crime before, categorical: 0= No, 1= Yes.
- Codefendants: Number of co-defendants, numeric.
- NumberVictim: Number of victims, numeric.
- WhiteVictim, HispanicVictim, BlackVictim, VictimOtherRace. FemaleVictim, MaleVictim: Number of victims with specified demographic features, numeric.
- LastStatement: Last statement of offender, character.

3. Acknowledgement

This dataset is derived from the database by Texas Department of Criminal Justice which can be found in this link: http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/death_row/dr_executed_offenders.html . It can be seen that the original one has fewer than 10 variables and is embedded with some links to sub-datasets, so I manually inputted more variables based on those links.

There are some complications with this dataset. Firstly, the dataset was manually created so mistakes are inevitable, though I have tried my best to minimize them. Secondly, the recording of offender information is not complete and consistent. For example, sometimes the education level of GED is interpreted as 11 years, at other times as 9 or 10 years. "None" and "NA" are used interchangeably, making it hard to distinguish between 0 and NA in the coded variable. The victim's information is often omitted, so I rely on the description of the crime for the names and pronouns to make a judgement of the number of victims and their gender. Finally, the last statements are sometimes recorded in the first person and sometimes in the third, so the word choice might not be original. That being said, I find this dataset meaningful and worth sharing.

4. Inspiration

What are the demographics of the death row inmates? What are the patterns of their last statements? What is the relationship between the two?

We provide a yearly categorization of death penalty status as well as changes of the status in the world. The database covers the period 1800-2022 for all currently independent countries in the world.

Don't Forget to upvote the dataset

DESCRIPTION From the Death Penalty Information Center, a list of all executions and related data since 1977. SUMMARY US Executions since 1977

The ​“Race of Victim” filter will display all executions involving any victim of the selected race, including cases that involved multiple victims of different races.

Information in this database is obtained from news reports, state Departments of Corrections and the NAACP Legal Defense Fund. Older county and victim-gender information was provided by Professor Frank Baumgartner of the University of North Carolina.

License: https://deathpenaltyinfo.org

Dataset from Singapore Prison Service. For more information, visit https://data.gov.sg/datasets/d_f4081559b7db4f792a395138a540db1d/view

This data collection effort was undertaken to analyze the outcomes of capital appeals in the United States between 1973 and 1995 and as a means of assessing the reliability of death penalty verdicts (also referred to herein as "capital judgments" or "death penalty judgments") imposed under modern death-sentencing procedures. Those procedures have been adopted since the decision in Furman v. Georgia in 1972. The United States Supreme Court's ruling in that case invalidated all then-existing death penalty laws, determining that the death penalty was applied in an "arbitrary and capricious" manner and violated Eighth Amendment protections against cruel and unusual punishment. Data provided in this collection include state characteristics and the outcomes of review of death verdicts by state and year at the state direct appeal, state post-conviction, federal habeas corpus, and all three stages of review (Part 1). Data were compiled from published and unpublished official and archived sources. Also provided in this collection are state and county characteristics and the outcome of review of death verdicts by county, state, and year at the state direct appeal, state post-conviction, federal habeas corpus, and all three stages of review (Part 2). After designing a systematic method for identifying official court decisions in capital appeals and state and federal post-conviction proceedings (no official or unofficial lists of those decisions existed prior to this study), the authors created three databases original to this study using information reported in those decisions. The first of the three original databases assembled as part of this project was the Direct Appeal Database (DADB) (Part 3). This database contains information on the timing and outcome of decisions on state direct appeals of capital verdicts imposed in all years during the 1973-1995 study period in which the relevant state had a valid post-Furman capital statute. The appeals in this database include all those that were identified as having been finally decided during the 1973 to 1995 period (sometimes called "the study period"). The second original database, State Post-Conviction Database (SPCDB) (Part 4), contains a list of capital verdicts that were imposed during the years between 1973 and 2000 when the relevant state had a valid post-Furman capital statute and that were finally reversed on state post-conviction review between 1973 and April 2000. The third original database, Habeas Corpus Database (HCDB) (Part 5), contains information on all decisions of initial (non-successive) capital federal habeas corpus cases between 1973 and 1995 that finally reviewed capital verdicts imposed during the years 1973 to 1995 when the relevant state had a valid post-Furman capital statute. Part 1 variables include state and state population, population density, death sentence year, year the state enacted a valid post-Furman capital statute, total homicides, number of African-Americans in the state population, number of white and African-American homicide victims, number of prison inmates, number of FBI Index Crimes, number of civil, criminal, and felony court cases awaiting decision, number of death verdicts, number of Black defendants sentenced to death, rate of white victims of homicides for which defendants were sentenced to death per 100 white homicide victims, percentage of death row inmates sentenced to death for offenses against at least one white victim, number of death verdicts reviewed, awaiting review, and granted relief at all three states of review, number of welfare recipients and welfare expenditures, direct expenditures on the court system, party-adjusted judicial ideology index, political pressure index, and several other created variables. Part 2 provides this same state-level information and also provides similar variables at the county level. Court expenditure and welfare data are not provided in Part 2, however. Part 3 provides data on each capital direct appeal decision, including state, FIPS state and county code for trial court county, year of death verdict, year of decision, whether the verdict was affirmed or reversed, and year of first fully valid post-Furman statute. The date and citation for rehearing in the state system and on certiorari to the United States Supreme Court are provided in some cases. For reversals in Part 4 information was collected about state of death verdict, FIPS state and county code for trial court county, year of death verdict, date of relief, basis for reversal, stage of trial and aspect of verdict (guilty of aggravated capital murder, death sentence) affected by reversal, outcome on retrial, and citation. Part 5 variables include state, FIPS state and county codes for trial court county, year of death verdict, defendant's history of alcohol or drug abuse, whether the defendant was intoxicated at the time of the crime, whether the defense attorney was from in-state, whether the defendant was connected to the community where the crime occurred, whether the victim had a high standing in the community, sex of the victim, whether the defendant had a prior record, whether a state evidentiary hearing was held, number of claims for final federal decision, whether a majority of the judges voting to reverse were appointed by Republican presidents, aggravating and mitigating circumstances, whether habeas corpus relief was granted, what claims for habeas corpus relief were presented, and the outcome on each claim that was presented. Part 5 also includes citations to the direct appeal decision, the state post-conviction decision (last state decision on merits), the judicial decision at the pre-penultimate federal stage, the decision at the penultimate federal stage, and the final federal decision.

Context

The death penalty was authorized by 32 states, the Federal Government, and the U.S. Military. While Connecticut, Maryland, and New Mexico no longer have death penalty statutes, they do currently incarcerate death-sentenced offenders. Texas leads the nation in the number of executions since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976. California, Florida, Texas, and Pennsylvania have the largest death row populations.

The following crimes are Capital Murder in Texas:

• murder of a peace officer or fireman who is acting in the lawful discharge of an official duty and who the person knows is a peace officer or fireman;

• murder during the commission or attempted commission of kidnapping, burglary, robbery, aggravated sexual assault, arson, obstruction or retaliation, or terroristic threat;

• murder for remuneration or promise of remuneration or employs another to commit murder for remuneration or promise of remuneration;

• murder during escape or attempted escape from a penal institution;

• murder, while incarcerated in a penal institution, of a correctional employee or with the intent to establish, maintain, or participate in a combination or in the profits of a combination;

• murder while incarcerated in a penal institution for a conviction of murder or capital murder;

• murder while incarcerated in a penal institution serving a life sentence or a 99 year sentence for a conviction of aggravated kidnapping, aggravated sexual assault, or aggravated robbery;

• murder of more than one person during the same criminal transaction or during different criminal transactions but the murders are committed pursuant to the same scheme or course of conduct;

• murder of an individual under ten years of age; or

• murder in retaliation for or on account of the service or status of the other person as a judge or justice of the supreme court, the court of criminal appeals, a court of appeals, a district court, a criminal district court, a constitutional county court, a statutory county court, a justice court, or a municipal court.

Content

The Texas Department of Criminal Justice publishes various details, including the last words, of every inmate on death row they execute. This dataset includes information on the name, age, race, county, date, and last words of Texas death row inmates from 1982 to 2017.

Acknowledgments

This dataset on last statements by executed offenders was obtained here: https://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/death_row/dr_executed_offenders.html

Start a new kernel

This data has been scraped from the Texas Department of Criminal Justice website. The data was collected in July 2020. Below you can find the description of each column.

1. Execution: Execution number
2. Last Name: last name
3. First Name: first name
4. TDCJNumber: Texas Department of Criminal Justice inmate number
5. Age: Inmate's age at time of execution
6. Date: Date of execution
7. Race: The inmate's racial identity
8. County: The county the inmate was residing in
9. Last Statement: The last statement the inmate made before execution
10. *NOTE: In the last statement column, any value that says "decline" means that the inmate refused to make a last statement.*

This dataset contains the predicted prices of the asset Charlie Kirk Assassin Death Penalty over the next 16 years. This data is calculated initially using a default 5 percent annual growth rate, and after page load, it features a sliding scale component where the user can then further adjust the growth rate to their own positive or negative projections. The maximum positive adjustable growth rate is 100 percent, and the minimum adjustable growth rate is -100 percent.

This collection furnishes data on executions performed under civil authority in the United States between 1608 and 2002. The dataset describes each individual executed and the circumstances surrounding the crime for which the person was convicted. Variables include age, race, name, sex, and occupation of the offender, place, jurisdiction, date, and method of execution, and the crime for which the offender was executed. Also recorded are data on whether the only evidence for the execution was official records indicating that an individual (executioner or slave owner) was compensated for an execution.

This collection consists of four summary variables based on new data collected by M. Watt Espy between 1986 and 1996 after he corrected and updated the data in 1992. See the related collection, EXECUTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1608-2002: THE ESPY FILE (ICPSR 8451). The summary variables consist of the ethnicity of the executed, the state, territory, district or colony of execution, the decade of execution, and the geographical region of execution. They were complete as of March 1, 1996.

These instructional materials were prepared for use with EXECUTIONS IN THE UNITED STATES, 1608-1991: THE ESPY FILE (ICPSR 8451), compiled by M. Watt Espy and John Ortiz Smykla. The data file (an SPSS portable file) and accompanying documentation are provided to assist educators in instructing students about the history of capital punishment in the United States. An instructor's handout is also included. This handout contains the following sections, among others: (1) general goals for student analysis of quantitative datasets, (2) specific goals in studying this dataset, (3) suggested appropriate courses for use of the dataset, (4) tips for using the dataset, and (5) related secondary source readings. This dataset furnishes data on executions performed under civil authority in the United States between 1608 and April 24, 1991, and describes each individual executed and the circumstances surrounding the crime for which the person was convicted. Variables include age, race, name, sex, and occupation of the offender, place, jurisdiction, date, and method of execution, and the crime for which the offender was executed. Also recorded are data on whether the only evidence for the execution was official records indicating that an individual (executioner or slave owner) was compensated for an execution.

Prison Inmates in India

Demographics, Age, Education, Caste, Wages, Rehabilitation, Technical Info

By Rajanand Ilangovan [source]

About this dataset

This dataset provides a detailed view of prison inmates in India, including their age, caste, and educational background. It includes information on inmates from all states/union territories for the year 2019 such as the number of male and female inmates aged 16-18 years, 18-30 year old inmates and those above 50 years old. The data also covers total number of penalized prisoners sentenced to death sentence, life imprisonment or executed by the state authorities. Additionally, it provides information regarding the crimehead (type) committed by an inmate along with its grand total across different age groups. This dataset not only sheds light on India’s criminal justice system but also highlights prevelance of crimes in different states and union territories as well as providing insight into crime trends across Indian states over time

More Datasets

For more datasets, click here.

Featured Notebooks

• 🚨 Your notebook can be here! 🚨!

How to use the dataset

This dataset provides a comprehensive look at the demographics, crimes and sentences of Indian prison inmates in 2019. The data is broken down by state/union territory, year, crime head, age groups and gender.

This dataset can be used to understand the demographic composition of the prison population in India as well as the types of crimes committed. It can also be used to gain insight into any changes or trends related to sentencing patterns in India over time. Furthermore, this data can provide valuable insight into potential correlations between different demographic factors (such as gender and caste) and specific types of crimes or length of sentences handed out.

To use this dataset effectively there are a few important things to keep in mind: •State/UT - This column refers to individual states or union territories in India where prisons are located •Year – This column indicates which year(s) the data relates to •Both genders - Female columns refer only to female prisoners while male columns refers only to male prisoners •Age Groups – 16-18 years old = 21-30 years old = 31-50 years old = 50+ years old •Crime Head – A broad definition for each type of crime that inmates have been convicted for •No Capital Punishment – The total number sentenced with capital punishment No Life Imprisonment – The total number sentenced with life imprisonment No Executed– The total number executed from death sentence Grand Total–The overall totals for each category

By using this information it is possible to answer questions regarding topics such as sentencing trends, types of crimes committed by different age groups or genders and state-by-state variation amongst other potential queries

Research Ideas

• Using the age and gender information to develop targeted outreach strategies for prisons in order to reduce recidivism rates.
• Creating an AI-based predictive model to predict crime trends by analyzing crime head data from a particular region/state and correlating it with population demographics, economic activity, etc.
• Analyzing the caste of inmates across different states in India in order to understand patterns of discrimination within the criminal justice system

Acknowledgements

If you use this dataset in your research, please credit the original authors. Data Source

License

License: Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) - You are free to: - Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially. - Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially. - You must: - Give appropriate credit - Provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. - ShareAlike - You must distribute your contributions under the same license as the original.

Columns

File: SLL_Crime_headwise_distribution_of_inmates_who_convicted.csv | Column name | Description | |:--------------------------|:---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | STATE/UT | Name of the state or union territory where the jail is located. (String) | | YEAR | Year when the inmate population data was collected. (Integer) ...

--- ### Context This dataset contains the complete detail about the Prison and various characteristics of inmates. This will help to understand better about prison system in India. ### Content 1. Details of Jail wise population of prison inmates 1. Details about the list of jails in India at the end of year 2015. 1. Jail category wise population of inmates. 1. Capacity of jails by inmate population. 1. Age group, nationality and gender wise population of inmates. 1. Religion and gender wise population of inmates. 1. Caste and gender wise population of inmates. 1. Education standards of inmates. 1. Domicile of inmates. 1. Incidence of recidivism. 1. Rehabilitation of prisoners. 1. Distribution of sentence periods of convicts in various jails by sex and age-groups. 1. Details of under trial prisoners by the type of IPC (Indian Penal Code) offences. 1. Details of convicts by the type of IPC (Indian Penal Code) offences. 1. Details of SLL (special & local law) Crime headwise distribution of inmates who convicted 1. Details of SLL (special & local law) Crime head wise distribution of inmates under trial 1. Details of educational facilities provided to prisoners. 1. Details of Jail breaks, group clashes and firing in jail (Tranquility). 1. Details of wages per day to convicts. 1. Details of Prison inmates trained under different vocational training. 1. Details of capital punishment (death sentence) and life imprisonment. 1. Details of prison inmates escaped. 1. Details of prison inmates released. 1. Details of Strength of officials 1. Details of Total Budget and Actual Expenditure during the year 2015-16. 1. Details of Budget 1. Details of Expenditure 1. Details of Expenditure on inmates 1. Details of Inmates suffering from mental ilness 1. Details of Period of detention of undertrials 1. Details of Number of women prisoners with children 1. Details of Details of inmates parole during the year 1. Details of Value of goods produced by inmates 1. Details of Number of vehicles available 1. Details of Training of Jail Officers 1. Details of Movements outside jail premises 1. Details of Details of electronic equipment used in prison ### Inspiration There are many questions about Indian prison with this dataset. Some of the interesting questions are 1. Percentage of jails over crowded. Is there any change in percentage over time? 1. How many percentage of inmates re-arrested? 1. Which state/u.t pay more wages to the inmates? 1. Which state/u.t has more capital punishment/life imprisonment inmates? 1. Inmates gender ratio per state ### Acknowledgements National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), Govt of India has shared this [dataset](https://data.gov.in/dataset-group-name/prison-statistics) under [Govt. Open Data License - India](https://data.gov.in/government-open-data-license-india). NCRB has also shared prison data on their [website](http://ncrb.nic.in/StatPublications/PSI/PrevPublications.htm). ---

The jurors in the Boston Marathon bombing trial have two options. They can sentence [b][url=http://www.moncleronsales.com/]Moncler Outlet[/url][/b] Dzhokhar Tsarnaev to a lifetime in federal prison, or they can recommend the death penalty. They have no other options. In court on Monday, Tsarnaev's attorneys asked the jurors to spare his life and send him to a federal supermax prison in Colorado. During his opening statements, defense attorney David Bruck held up a photo of the United States Penitentiary Administrative Maximum [b][url=http://www.moncleronsales.com/]Moncler Jackets Outlet[/url][/b] Facility in Florence, Colorado. "If you sentence him to life, this is where he will be," Bruck told jurors. The prison, also known as ADX Florence, houses a who's who of America's most notorious terrorists, including 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui and "Unabomber" Ted Kaczynski. Other notorious inmates at the prison: attempted shoe bomber Richard Reid, attempted underwear bomber Umar Abdulmutallab, and four of the co-conspirators of the 1993 World [b]www.moncleronsales.com [/b] Trade Center bombing. Tsarnaev's attorneys hope that the jury will agree that ADX Florence is the best place for their client. "He'd go here and be forgotten," Bruck told the jurors. "His legal case would be over for good, and no martyrdom. That might be, that should be, a vote for life." Life inside ADX Florence is harsh. According to the New York Times, inmates spend approximately 23 hours each day in solitary confinement, living in 12-ft.-by-7-ft. cells with solid metal doors so that prisoners cannot see one another.

In 1996, the United States Congress enacted two policies to regulate the use of the legal system by state prisoners. They were the Prisoner Litigation Reform Act (PLRA) and the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA). The purpose of this research project was to examine whether the PLRA and the AEDPA had their intended effects of reducing the number of Section 1983 lawsuits and habeas corpus petitions, respectively, at both the national and circuit court levels. The researchers obtained data, from the Research and Statistics Division of the Administrative Office of the United States Courts, on the number of civil rights suits and the number of habeas corpus petitions filed by state prisoners in district courts from April 1992 to December 2000. These data were organized into monthly increments. Dataset 1, Civil Rights Suits Filed, contains 105 cases, and Dataset 2, Habeas Corpus Petitions Filed, also contains 105 cases. The trends in civil rights suits filed (Dataset 1) and habeas corpus petitions filed (Dataset 2) were measured by the number of petitions filed per 10,000 state prisoners. Filing rates were measured at the level of district courts, grouped together by the circuit court that has jurisdiction over them. Variables in Dataset 1, Civil Rights Suits Filed, include filing date and the number of civil rights suits filed per 10,000 state prisoners at the national level as well as for district courts within each of the 11 circuits and the District of Columbia. An intervention flag variable is also included. Variables in Dataset 2, Habeas Corpus Petitions Filed, include filing date and the number of habeas corpus petitions filed per 10,000 state prisoners at the national level, as well as for district courts within each of the 11 circuits and the District of Columbia. A pulse flag variable and two intervention flag variables are also included.