Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Santa Clara County, CA was 1619.00000 Known Incidents in January of 2020, according to the United States Federal Reserve. Historically, Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Santa Clara County, CA reached a record high of 2827.00000 in January of 2006 and a record low of 1529.00000 in January of 2014. Trading Economics provides the current actual value, an historical data chart and related indicators for Combined Violent and Property Crime Offenses Known to Law Enforcement in Santa Clara County, CA - last updated from the United States Federal Reserve on July of 2025.

Santa Clara County Sheriff's Office incident dataset

This study focused on the effect of economic resources and racial/ethnic composition on the change in crime rates from 1970-2004 in United States cities in metropolitan areas that experienced a large growth in population after World War II. A total of 352 cities in the following United States metropolitan areas were selected for this study: Atlanta, Dallas, Denver, Houston, Las Vegas, Miami, Orange County, Orlando, Phoenix, Riverside, San Bernardino, San Diego, Silicon Valley (Santa Clara), and Tampa/St. Petersburg. Selection was based on the fact that these areas developed during a similar time period and followed comparable development trajectories. In particular, these 14 areas, known as the "boomburbs" for their dramatic, post-World War II population growth, all faced issues relating to the rapid growth of tract-style housing and the subsequent development of low density, urban sprawls. The study combined place-level data obtained from the United States Census with crime data from the Uniform Crime Reports for five categories of Type I crimes: aggravated assaults, robberies, murders, burglaries, and motor vehicle thefts. The dataset contains a total of 247 variables pertaining to crime, economic resources, and race/ethnic composition.

Each record in this data set represents one incident. Please note, multiple calls received for any incident will be represented only once in this data set.

Zip Code, Number of vehicle-pedestrian injury collisions, 10 years; Number of vehicle-bicycle injury collisions, 10 years; Number of motor vehicle collisions, 1 year; Drive alone; Carpool; Public transportation; Other; Commute time of 30 minutes or more; Households receiving CalFresh benefits; Average distance (miles) to nearest full-service grocery store; Average distance (miles) to nearest farmers’ market; Number of fast food outlets per square mile; Adults who ate 2+ servings of fruit the previous day; Adults who ate 3+ servings of vegetables the previous day; Adults who ate fast food at least weekly in past 30 days; Adults whose household shops for fruits and vegetables only within community/neighborhood; Adult(s) in family ever received food from a church, a food pantry, or food bank in past 12 months; Households with gross rent 30% or more of household income; Overcrowded households; Lives in multi-unit housing; Adults who met CDC recommendations for aerobic physical activity; Average distance (miles) to nearest park or open space; Number of tobacco retail outlets per square mile; Average number of violent crimes within 1 mile; Number of alcohol retail outlets per square mile; Adults who report neighborhood crime, violence, and drug activity is somewhat of or a major problem; Adults with any firearms now kept in or around home; Adults who were ever hit, slapped, pushed, kicked, or hurt in any way by an intimate partner; Ozone; PM25; Births per 1,000 people; Low birth weight infants; Preterm births; Overweight or obese in first trimester of pregnancy; Mothers who received early and adequate prenatal care; Teen live births per 1,000 females, ages 15-19; Adults with health coverage (ages 18-64); Adults with dental insurance; Adults with fair or poor self-rated health; Adults who have health condition(s) that limit(s) activities; Adults who were ever diagnosed with depression; Adults who are obese; Adults who received a flu shot or nasal flu vaccine in the past 12 months; Adults who engaged in binge drinking in the past 30 days; Adults who were ever diagnosed with high blood pressure (hypertension); Adults who were ever diagnosed with asthma; Adults who were ever diagnosed with diabetes; Adults who had 1+ falls in past 3 months (ages 45+)). Percentages unless otherwise noted. Source information provided at: https://www.sccgov.org/sites/phd/hi/hd/Documents/City%20Profiles/Methodology/Neighborhood%20profile%20methodology_082914%20final%20for%20web.pdf

Funded by the National Institute of Justice, this data collection represents Phase II of a larger project to evaluate pretrial release practices. The study focuses on four major topics: (1) release--rates and types of releases, defendant or case characteristics and their impact on the release decision, (2) court appearance --extent to which released defendants appear in court, factors associated with defendants' failure to appear in court, (3) pretrial criminality--number of rearrests during the pretrial period and the factors predicting rearrest, charges and rates of conviction for crimes committed during the pretrial period, and (4) impact of pretrial release programs--effect of programs on release decisions and on the behavior of defendants. The study is limited to adult defendants processed through state and local trial courts, and to pretrial release rather than pretrial intervention or diversion programs. Part 1 is an analysis of release practices and outcomes in eight jurisdictions (Baltimore City and Baltimore County, Maryland, Washington, DC, Dade County, Florida, Jefferson County, Kentucky, Pima County, Arizona, Santa Cruz County, California, and Santa Clara County, California). The pretrial release 'delivery systems,' that is, the major steps and individuals and organizations in the pretrial release process, were analyzed in each jurisdiction. Additionally, a sample of defendants from each site was studied from point of arrest to final case disposition and sentencing. Part 2 of this study examines the impact of the existence of pretrial release programs on release, court appearance, and pretrial release outcomes. An experimental design was used to compare a group of defendants who participated in a pretrial release program with a control group who did not. Experiments were conducted in Pima County (Tucson), Arizona, Baltimore City, Maryland, Lincoln, Nebraska, and Jefferson County (Beaumont-Port Arthur), Texas. In Tucson, separate experiments were conducted for felony and misdemeanor cases.