Prosecutorial discretion not to invoke the criminal process and its impact on firearm cases

Purpose: Using detailed case-level data on firearm arrests in Philadelphia, both before and after the formal adoption of progressive prosecution policies, this paper examines the multiple organizational channels through which progressive prosecution has been theorized to impact firearm prosecutions. These include direct policy impacts, indirect policy spillovers, returns from resource reallocation, and personnel changes. Methods: To examine these effects throughout the life of a case, we combine descriptive and formal statistical models, including regression, proportional hazards models, and overlap indices. Results: There is little evidence that high-profile progressive prosecution policies impacted initial charging decisions on gun prosecutions. Conversely, there is also no evidence that reprioritization away from non-violent offenses, at least in the short-term, increased the available resources to address gun cases. However, there is evidence that the arrival of progressive prosecution in Philadelphia led to a temporary decline in the experience of prosecutors working gun cases and that this change could at least partially explain an observed short-term increase in case dismissals and open cases. Conclusions: Our findings suggest progressive prosecution, while not begun as an effort to impact gun prosecution, still may have impacted it, albeit to a much smaller extent than that observed for its focal priorities.