MarijuanainIndiana

Arrests,Usage,andRelatedData
JonGettman,Ph.D. TheBulletinofCannabisReform www.drugscience.org 10/19/2009

MarijuanainIndiana
Introduction Thisstatereportispartofacomprehensivepresentationofnational,state,county,andlocalleveldata onmarijuanaarrestsintheUnitedStates.TheprimaryreportinthiscollectionisMarijuanaArrestsin theUnitedStates(2007).1AdditionaldetailsonmarijuanaarrestsandrelatedtopicsinIndianaare availableintheMarijuanaPolicyAlmanac2,fromwhichthedatapresentedbelowhasbeenexcerpted. ArresttotalsarebasedonUniformCrimeReporting(UCR)programdata;localdatamaydifferdueto variousreasons,includingreportingproceduresanddataavailability. Therewere16,397arrestsformarijuanaoffensesinIndianain2007,representinganarrestrateof258 per100,000,whichranksIndianaatnumber24inthenation.Therewereanestimated512,000past yearmarijuanausersinIndianaduring2007.Reconcilingthisestimatewiththenumberofarrestsfor marijuanaoffensesprovidesanarrestrateof3,203per100,000users,whichranksIndianaatnumber 26inthenation. Intermsofoverallseverityofmaximumsentencesformarijuanapossession,Indianaranksnumber9in thenation(basedonpenaltiesforafirstoffense).Whenitcomestopenaltiesforjustunder1ounceof marijuana,Indianaisrankedatnumber3,alongwith17otherstates(becauseofsimilaritiesbetween statesthereareonly12rankingsinthiscategory).Herearethepenaltiesforpossessionofvarious amountsofmarijuanainIndiana: Amount Max.Sentence Max.Fine 1Ounce* 1year $5,000 2Ounces 3years $10,000 3Ounces 3years $10,000 4Ounces 3years $10,000 (*Tosimplifycomparisons,forsomestatesthiscategorycoversamountsjustunder1ounce) Marijuanapossessionarrestsaccountedfor88%ofallmarijuanaarrestsinIndianaduring2007. (Nationally,marijuanapossessionarrestsaccountfor89%ofallmarijuanaarrests.)Therewere14,493 arrestsformarijuanapossessioninIndianain2007,and1,904arrestsformarijuanasales.Thearrest rateformarijuanapossessioninIndianawas228per100,000for2007,whilethearrestratefor marijuanasaleswas30.Marijuanaarrestsalsoaccountedfor57%ofalldrugarrestsinIndianaduring 2007.

1 2

http://www.drugscience.org/Archive/bcr7/bcr7_index.html http://www.drugscience.org/States/US/US_home.htm

MarijuanainIndiana
HereisanoverallscorecardforhowIndianaranksnationallyintermsofmarijuanaarrests,penalties, andmarijuanause.
Category MaximumSentencesforPossession MaximumSentenceforPossessionof1ounce ArrestRateper100,000population ArrestRateper100,000users PastMonthUsers(Pct.) PastYearUsers(Pct.) PastMonthUsersAge12 17(Pct.) PastYearUsersAge12 17(Pct.) Ranking 9 3 24 26 23 29 15 33

ThisreportprovidesasummaryofthefollowingtopicsrelatedtomarijuanaarrestsinIndiana:(1) relatednationaltrends,(2)trendsinIndianamarijuanaarrestsandmarijuanause,(3)thecostsof marijuanaarrestsinIndiana,(4)statisticsonpastmonthandpastyearmarijuanauseinIndianabyage group,(5)countylevelrankingsinmarijuanaarrestsandrates,and(6)drugtreatmentadmissionsfor alcohol,marijuana,andotherdrugs.Extensivedetailontheseandrelatedsubjects,includinglocal agencymarijuanaarrestdataandhistoricaldata,isavailableintableformatintheonlineMarijuana PolicyAlmanac3forIndianaandotherstates,aswellassimilarnationaldata. 1)BackgroundNationalTrendsinArrestsandMarijuanaUsefrom2003to2007 Whilemarijuanaarrestshaveincreasedsignificantlysincethe1980s,theprevalenceofmarijuanausein theUnitedStateshasremainedessentiallyunchanged. MarijuanaarrestsintheUnitedStatesincreasedfrom755,200in2003to872,720in2007.This representsanaverageannualizedchangeof+2.93%peryear. Historically,marijuanaarrestsintheUnitedStatesincreasedby150%inthe1990s,risingdramatically from287,850in1991to723,627 in2001,anaverageannualizedchangeof8.74%peryear.Duringthis timethenumberofindividualswhoreportedmarijuanauseinnationalsurveysincreasedmodestlyfrom 19.2millionin1991to21millionin2001. Thearrestrateformarijuanaoffenses(possessionandsalescombined)intheUnitedStateshas increasedfrom260per100,000in2003to290in2007.Thisrepresentsanaverageannualizedchange of+2.19%peryear. ThenumberofpastyearmarijuanausersintheUnitedStateshasremainedrelativelystableduringthis period,changingfrom25.5millionannualusersin2003to25.2millionannualusersin2007.The numberofpastmonthusershasalsoremainedthesame,14.6millioninboth2003and2007. Onapercentagebasis,annualmarijuanausewasreportedby10.78%ofthepopulationin2003and 10.22%in2007,whilemonthlyusewasreportedby6.18%in2003and5.92%in2007.

http://www.drugscience.org/States/US/US_home.htm

MarijuanainIndiana
Consequently,atthenationalleveloverthelastfiveyears,anincreaseinmarijuanaarrestsof2.93%per yearhasresultedinanaverageannualizeddecreaseinthenumberofannualmarijuanausersof0.21% peryearandasimilardecreaseintheprevalenceofannualmarijuanauseof0.03%peryear. 2)MarijuanaArrestandUseTrendsinIndiana(20032007) MarijuanaarrestsinIndianaincreasedfrom15,597in2003to16,397in2007.Thearrestratein2003 was252per100,000whilein2007itwas258. Comparedtoa2.93%averageannualincreaseinmarijuanaarrestsnationally,marijuanaarrestsin Indianaincreasedby1.01%peryear.(Whilethearrestratenationallyincreased2.19%annuallyinthis period,inIndianathearrestratechangedby2.60%peryear.) Duringthissameperiod,thenumberofannualmarijuanausersinIndianadecreasedfrom521,000in 2003to512,000in2007.Thiswasanaverageannualizedchangeof0.35%peryear.Thenumberof monthlymarijuanausersincreasedfrom309,000in2003to312,000in2007,whichproducedan averageannualizedchangeof0.19%. 3)TheCostsofMarijuanaLaws Theabovecomparisonofmarijuanaarrestsandmarijuanauseprovideabasisforevaluatingthe benefitsofmarijuanalaws.Herearethreeperspectivesthathelpframetheissueofevaluatingthecosts ofmarijuanalawsinIndiana. a)FiscalCosts. ThecriminaljusticesysteminIndianacost$2.39billionfor2006.Thisincludesstate,county,andlocal costs.Hereisthebreakdownforthosecosts: PoliceProtection $1.04billion JudicialandLegalServices $419.53million Corrections $934.10million Total $2.39billion ThefederalOfficeofNationalDrugControlPolicy(ONDCP)providesasimplewayofmakingageneral estimateofthecriminaljusticecostsofdrugrelatedarrests.Actually,estimatingthecostsofdifferent typesofarrestsisaverycomplicatedchallengebecauseofthedifferencesbetweenindividualoffenses and,forexample,theinvestigativeandfollowupworktheyrequire.Howevertheuseofapercentage basismethodprovidesageneralestimateofthecostsassociatedwithmarijuanaoffenses.Themethod utilizedbyONDCPisto(a)calculatethepercentageoftotalarrestsaccountedforbydrugarrestsand then(b)applythatpercentagetototalcriminaljusticesystemcosts. Therewere296,471arrestsinIndianain2006.Therewere18,455marijuanaarreststhatyear, accountingfor6.22%ofallarrestsinIndianafor2006.Consequently,accordingtothispercentagebasis methodofestimation,marijuanaarrestscost$148.81millioninIndianafor2006.

MarijuanainIndiana
b)OpportunityCosts Budgetsare,outofnecessity,aboutmakingchoices.Thisisespeciallytruewhenresourcesarescarce, suchaswhenstateandlocalgovernmentsaregrapplingwithbudgetgapsbetweenrevenueand programcommitments.Economistsrecognizeopportunitycostsastheconsequencesofmakingspecific budgetarydecisions.Providingfundsforoneprogramoftenmeansacceptinglessornofundsforsome othergovernmentactivity.Forexample,providinglawenforcementwiththeobligation,or opportunity,tomakearrestsformarijuanaoffensesdepriveslawenforcementoffundstoapplyto otherinvestigationsandactivities. Lawenforcementagenciespublishstatisticsontheirabilitytoresolveknownoffensesthroughthearrest ofcriminalsuspects.Afteranoffenseisreportedtothepolice,theobjectiveisclearedbyanarrest. Crimeratesarebasedonthenumberofreportedoffenses.Arrestratesarebasedonthenumberof arrests.Clearancerates,usuallyprovidedforthemostseriouscrimes,arebasedonthepercentageof knownoffensesclearedbyarrest. Herearethe2007clearanceratesforseriouscrimesinIndiana: Murder 69.40% Rape 43.20% Robbery 27.70% Assault 52.60% Larceny 17.80% MotorVehicleTheft 18.60% Alltheabovecrimes 25.90% Anothersignificantaspectofevaluatinglawenforcementprioritiesconcernsthegrowingeconomic impactofwhatisreferredtoaswhitecollarcrime.Thisisabroadtermforwhatareessentiallynon violenttheft,includingsuchcrimesasfraud,identitytheft,embezzlement,andsecuritiesfraud.Whilea greatdealofmediaattentionisdevotedtolawenforcementresponsestostreetcrimes,theeconomic impactofthesecrimesisdwarfedbythemagnitudeofwhitecollarcrime,whichisconservatively estimatedtohaveanimpactof10timesthevalueofstreetcrimes. Marijuanaarrestsalsodivertlawenforcementandcriminaljusticesystemresourcesfrompossession andsalesoffensesinvolvingotherillicitdrugs.In2007,marijuanaarrestswere57%ofalldrugarrestsin Indiana.Otherdrugssuchascocaine,heroin,methamphetamine,andsyntheticnarcoticssuchas Oxycontinpresentfarmoreseriousthreatstobothindividualsandthepublic.Theseotherillegaldrugs alsohavefarmoreseveredependenceliabilitiesthanmarijuana.Hereisasummaryofdrugarrestsin Indianafor2007: Drug Arrests Pct. Opiates/Cocaine 6,605 23% Marijuana 16,397 57% SyntheticNarcotics 2,160 7% OtherDangerousDrugs 3,410 12% AllIllicitDrugs 29,004 100%

MarijuanainIndiana
Theneedtoimproveclearanceratesforseriouscrime,todevotegreaterresourcestowhitecollar crime,andtoaddresstheproblemspresentedbymoredangerousdrugsallprovidecompellingreasons forsocietytoreconsiderwhethertheopportunitycostsofmarijuanalawenforcementareacceptable. c)SocialCosts Marijuanaarrestshaveadisproportionateimpactontwodemographicgroupsyoungpeopleand minorities.Inmanycasesanarrestformarijuanapossessionmakesacriminaloutofanotherwiselaw abidingindividual.Itisnotsurprisingthatthemajorityofmarijuanaarrestsinvolveteenagersand youngadultsgiventhepopularityofmarijuanausewithyoungeragegroups.Howeverdifferencesin thearrestratesbetweenwhitesandblackscannotbeexplainedbydifferencesinmarijuanause.In 2007,forexample,10.5%ofwhitesusedmarijuanainthelastyearwhile12.2%ofblacksreportedsuch use.Formarijuanauseinthelastmonth,thecomparablefigureswere6%ofwhitesand7.2%ofblacks. Thesefiguresindicatethatmarijuanausebyblacksisabout20%moreprevalentthanusebywhites. Whilethisisastatisticallysignificantdifference,itdoesnotexplainwhyarrestratesformarijuana possessionforblacksarethreetimeshighernationallythanforwhites.Forexample,thearrestrateper 100,000forblacksin2007was598,whileforwhitesthearrestratewas195. Hereareselected2007marijuanapossessionarrestratesforIndiana: Group PctofArrests ArrestRate per100,000 Allindividuals 100% 228 Malesage15to19 26% 1,675 Femalesage15to19 4% 297 Malesage20to24 24% 1,614 Femalesage20to24 4% 299 Whites 68% 184 Blacks 31% 783 4)MarijuanaUse Therewere512,000annualmarijuanausersinIndianaduring2007,ofwhich312,000reported marijuanauseinthepastmonth.Asnotedabove,thenumberofannualmarijuanausersinIndiana decreasedfrom521,000in2003to512,000in2007.Thiswasanaverageannualizedchangeof0.35% peryear.Thenumberofmonthlymarijuanausersincreasedfrom309,000in2003to312,000in2007, whichproducedanaverageannualizedchangeof0.19%. Thereisgeneralconsensusthatminorsshouldnotusealcohol,marijuana,ortobacco.Accordingtothe mostrecent(2007)data12.40%or67,000youthsaged12to17inIndianausedmarijuanainthepast year.Ofthese,7.40%(ofthetotalpopulationofthisagegroup)or40,000youthsusedmarijuanainthe pastmonth.Marijuanasillegalstatusdidnotpreventtheseyouthsfromhavingaccesstomarijuana. Indeed,mostteenagersreportthatmarijuanaisfairlyeasytoobtain.Oneofthereasonsmarijuana remainseasyforyouthstoobtainistheprofitincentivecreatedbytheillegalmarket.Simplyput, teenagersmakemoneybysellingmarijuanatootheryouths,whichincreasestheavailabilityof marijuanaamongteens.Inthisway,marijuanasillegalitymakesitmorewidelyandreadilyavailableto teenagers. 5

MarijuanainIndiana
Herearedataontheprevalenceandpopulationestimatesformarijuanausebyvariousagegroupsin Indiana: PastMonthMarijuanaUse(2007) Age Pct. Pop. Age12to17 7.40% 40,000 Age18to25 16.20% 112,000 Age26+ 4.10% 161,000 Total 6.00% 312,000 PastYearMarijuanaUse(2007) Age Pct. Pop. Age12to17 12.40% 67,000 Age18to25 27.60% 190,000 Age26+ 6.40% 255,000 Total 9.90% 512,000 5)CountyLevelRankings Mostmarijuanaarrestsaremadebylocalpoliceagencies.Individualagenciesandofficersexercise considerablediscretionregardinglawenforcement,notjustformarijuanaoffenses,butforanumberof offenses.Thenumberofmarijuanaarrestsalsovariesbecauseofdifferencesinlocalpopulationsand thelocalprevalenceofmarijuanause.Furthermore,someareashaveexceptionallyhigharrestratesfor marijuanabecausetheyattractlargevisitorpopulations.Becausearrestratesarecalculatedbydividing thenumberofarrestsbythelocalresidentpopulation,numerousarrestsofvisitorstothearea artificiallyinflatethelocalarrestrate.Foratownwitharelativelysmallpopulation,thearrestofseveral peopledrivingthroughthetownoronanearbyhighway(suchasaninterstate)canproducea comparativelyhigharrestrateformarijuanapossession. Collegetownsmayhavelargearrestratesformarijuanaoffensesbecausetheyhavelargerresident populationsofyoungadults,amongwhommarijuanauseismoreprevalentthaninolderpopulations. Ontheotherhand,collegetownsmayhavelowerarrestratesformarijuanapossession,forexample, becauseofthediscretionarypoliciesoflocalpoliceagencies. Similarly,areaswithlargeconcentrationsofAfricanAmericansmayhavehigherarrestratesfor marijuanapossessionthanotherareasbecauselawenforcementagenciesthroughouttheUnitedStates consistentlyarrestmoreblacksformarijuanapossessionthanwhites. Areassuchasbeachtowns,skiresorts,andnaturalresourceareasalsoexhibitrelativelyhighmarijuana arrestratesbecausetheyattractnumerousvisitors,includinglargenumbersofyoungadults. Finally,someareashavelargerarrestratesformarijuanapossessionsimplybecausemarijuanauseis popularamongthelocalresidents;localpoliceagencieshaveaggressiveenforcementpolicies,orboth. Countylevelmarijuanapossessionarrestratesshouldbecomparedagainstthebenchmarkprovidedby thestatewidearrestrateof228inIndianafor2007.Thefollowingtablesprovidetheleadingcountiesin 6

MarijuanainIndiana
Indianaformarijuanapossessionarrests,marijuanapossessionarrestrates,thepossessionarrestrates formalesaged15to19,andthepossessionarrestratesforblacks: IndianaCountyLeaders inMarijuanaPossessionArrests(2007) Marion 2,309 Lake 1,137 Allen 755 Tippecanoe 698 StJoseph 615 IndianaCountyLeaders inMarijuanaPossessionArrestRates(2007) Bartholomew 474 Rush 472 Union 453 Tippecanoe 444 White 433 IndianaCountyLeaders inMarijuanaPossessionArrestRates,MalesAged15to19(2007) Rush 5,858 Perry 5,314 Decatur 5,302 Bartholomew 4,713 Kosciusko 4,250 IndianaCountyLeaders inMarijuanaPossessionArrestRatesofBlacks(2007) Tipton 5,450 Dubois 5,093 Montgomery 4,870 Union 4,849 Adams 4,133 6)DrugTreatmentAdmissionTrends Dataondrugtreatmentadmissionsisoftenusedtojustifydevotinglawenforcementresourcesto makingmarijuanaarrests.Theargumentistwofold.First,thenumberofmarijuanarelatedadmissions todrugtreatmentfacilitiesisofferedasevidencethatmarijuanaisadangerousdrug.Second, marijuanaarrestsarejustifiedbecausetheyforcepeopletogettreatment. Thereareanumberofflawstothisargument.Alcoholisalsoresponsibleforalargeproportionofdrug treatmentadmissions,howeverregulationiswidelyrecognizedasthemosteffectivepolicyfor 7

MarijuanainIndiana
restrictingaccessandreducingprohibitionrelatedcrime.Furthermore,despitewelldeservedpublic concernoverdrugabuseandageneralconsensusthatitshouldbereduced,drugabuseisnotacrime. Thelegalbasisfordruglawsisthatthemanufacture,distribution,sale,andpossessionofdrugsare illegal.Itisunconstitutionaltocriminalizeillness,mentalhealthproblems,ordrugdependencyinthe UnitedStates.Alcoholism,forexample,isnotillegal.Insteadweholdalcoholicslegallyaccountablefor theirconduct,suchasbeingdrunkinpublicordrivingwhileintoxicated.Forcingindividualsintodrug treatmentprogramsisadubiousjustificationformakingarrestsofindividualsformarijuanapossession. Lawenforcementofficers,prosecutors,andothercriminaljusticeprofessionalsarenotmedicallytrained orcertifiedtodiagnosedrugdependencyandmakediscretionarydecisionsaboutindividualtreatment requirements. Howeverthemostsignificantcharacteristicofmarijuanarelateddrugtreatmentadmissionsisthata majorityoftheminIndianaaretheresultofreferralsfromthecriminaljusticesystem,oftenasan alternativetojailtimeasasentenceforamarijuanapossessionorsalesoffense. During2007,therewere6,916admissionsfordrugtreatmentservicesinIndiana.Ofthese,65.19% weretheresultofreferralsfromtheIndianacriminaljusticesystem. Hereisabreakdownofthemajorityof2007drugtreatmentadmissionsinIndiana: PrimaryDrug Admissions Pct. Alcohol 14,000 48% Marijuana 6,916 24% Cocaine 3,420 12% SyntheticNarcotics 1,689 6% Methamphetamine 1,395 5% AllAdmissions 29,087 100% Sources: SentencesforMarijuanaPossessionwereobtainedfrom:ImpacTeenIllicitDrugTeam.Illicitdrug policies:Selectedlawsfromthe50states.BerrienSprings,MI:AndrewsUniversity,2002. http://www.impacteen.org/generalarea_PDFs/IDTchartbook032103.pdfandupdatedfromother sources.Rankingsofsentenceswerecalculatedindependentlyandarebasedonthemaximumnumber ofdaysallowedbystatelawforthelistedquantitiesofmarijuana.Theoverallrankingisbasedona weightedindexforthefourquantitylevels.Theweightingusedinthisindexwas:70%forpenaltiesfor 1ounceand10%eachforthepenaltiesfor2,3,and4ounces. AllarrestandclearancedatawereobtainedfromtheFBIsUniformCrimeReporting(UCR)Program. DataondrugusewereobtainedfromtheNationalSurveyonDrugUseandHealth(NSDUH);dataon drugtreatmentadmissionswereobtainedfromtheTreatmentEpisodesDataSet(TEDS).NSDUHand TEDSarecompiledandpublishedbytheSubstanceAbuseandMentalHealthServicesAdministration (SAMHSA)oftheU.S.DepartmentofHealthandHumanServices.DataonCriminalJusticeServicecosts wereobtainedfromtheCriminalJusticeExpenditureandEmploymentExtractsProgram(CJEE)ofthe BureauofJusticeStatisticsoftheU.S.DepartmentofJustice.Moreinformationonsourcedataforthis reportcanbeobtainedathttp://www.drugscience.org/States/Notes.htm.