Our clients are attorneys who want to put forth compelling legal arguments and make changes to the law but lack evidentiary support – that is where LDDC comes in. Below is a sampling of work product created by student attorneys that has been used by our clients as statistical and analytical support for their positions.

2022

The Impact of Digital Evidence on Baltimore City Office of the Public Defender Felony Unity Caseloads

OPD_LDDC_Pilot_Study_FINAL This report presents the results of an eight-week time caseload study that examines the qualitative and quantitative impact of the proliferation of digital evidence such as body-worn camera footage, security camera footage, and smart phone data on typical OPD felony-unit attorneys. Based on its original data analysis, the report shows that 1) the amount of time spent by attorneys reviewing discovery (as the result of digital evidence including BWC footage) has increased substantially since the 2005 statewide OPD study conducted on attorney workloads; and 2) there is insufficient time available for attorneys to fully review the total scope of digital discovery.

2021

Racial Disparity in the Charles County Justice System 2016 – 2020

At the request of Southern Marylanders for Racial Equity (SoMD 4 Racial Equity), the Legal Data and Design Clinic undertook a study comparing criminal charges between races in District and Circuit court in Charles County. The LDDC’s analysis is summarized in the Infographic on this site and explored in detail in the posted Appendix. The LDDC discovered that there is significant inequality between the charges faced by Black and white residents of Charles County.

Study Findings on Domestic Violence Pretrial Incarcerations

In February 2021, The Office of the Public Defender (OPD) approached the UB Legal Data and Design Clinic (LDDC) to investigate their anecdotal suspicion that 70-80% of defendants charged with domestic violence (DV) related offenses in Baltimore City receive Nolle Prosequi (NP) dispositions. Since many defendants whose cases are ultimately dismissed are held without bail pretrial, the concern was that DV defendants suffer excessive and unnecessary pretrial incarceration. The LDDC agreed to investigate OPD’s concerns by conducting an empirical study of Baltimore City’s main DV docket. This report and the accompanying infographic presents the LDDC’s findings.

Testimony in Support of House Bill 580

Charles_County_Appendix_Final_Deliverable Cco_Infographic_Final Deliverable

The Legal Data & Design Clinic pursues evidence-based decision-making. We believe it is vital to show both (1) the sources of our data and (2) how our data analysis supports our advocacy. To that end, this is our written testimony submitted to the House Judiciary Committee in support of HB580. Coming off the success of House Bill 280, we picked up where we left off in the battle against the criminalization of poverty. It contains a summary of our findings, which reveal that automatic license suspensions for failure to pay child support arrearages disproportionately affect African Americans and poorer, rural areas.

2020

Testimony in Support of House Bill 280

The Legal Data & Design Clinic pursues evidence-based decision-making. We believe it is vital to show both (1) the sources of our data and (2) how our data analysis supports our advocacy. To that end, this is our written testimony submitted to the House Judiciary Committee in support of HB280. It contains a summary of our findings, which reveal that automatic license suspensions for failure to pay traffic-related debt disproportionately affect African Americans and poorer, rural areas. This testimony also rebuts the position that enacting this bill into law would be a financial burden on the state. Such an argument fails to consider the potential savings in costs and other economic benefits this bill would produce.

HB280 Infographic & Underlying Data

Having good data is foundational to any type of analysis. Analyzing data with quality control protocols is essential for producing accurate results. However, our meticulous data wrangling and analysis mean nothing if we could not deliver the information to our intended audience. In the initial stages of a project, LDDC student attorneys prototype a vision for the final work product that is customized to the client’s needs. When testifying for HB280, LDDC student attorneys provided the following handout to delegates of the House Judiciary Committee. Designed to quickly convey our findings, the handout furthers our advocacy through the use of data visualizations. LDDC interrogates complex datasets and engages in sophisticated computations to arm clients with data-driven arguments.

For those interested in taking a deep dive into the original data underlying the LDDC’s HB280 testimony and inforraphic, download an Excel Workbook with seven interrelated spreadsheets at this link: HB280 – Brief Data Summary – FINAL.

Name Change Publication Requirements by County in Maryland

Changing one’s legal name is often a deeply personal decision. The current law, however, requires one wishing to change his/her/their name to publish it in a local print newspaper and the internet for online circulation. This could be particularly troubling for individuals who do not wish to be associated with their former legal identity, namely those in the LGBTQ+ community. In addition, the costs of publication vary greatly among counties, making a change of name potentially more burdensome for lower income individuals in those higher-priced regions. Here is a list of each county’s publication costs and requirements. Note: The Circuit Court where the name change petition is filed allows for publication in “any newspaper of general circulation.” Therefore, this list is not exhaustive but merely indicates the most typical newspaper in each county.

Data Underlying “The Ongoing Fight Against Oppressive Bail” Blog

Much of what LDDC does involves advocating for criminal justice reform as well as closely examining the practical significance of changes already enacted. While a new statute or judicial opinion will seem to have a positive effect, the underlying statistical evidence often tells a different story. Maryland Rule 4-216.1 was intended to remedy the injustice associated with cash bail but in practice, has had unintended deleterious consequences on the criminal justice system. On March 12, 2020, LDDC Student Attorney Jose Zelada published a blog post analyzing the impact of the MD Rule 4-216.1, which went into effect on July 1, 2017. Here is the raw data supporting the analysis in that blog post: MD_Bail_Rule_underlying_data.xlsx