This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-11-167R 
entitled 'U.S. Department of Justice Declinations of Indian Country 
Criminal Matters' which was released on December 13, 2010. 

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as 
part of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. 
Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data 
integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, 
such as text descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes 
placed at the end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, 
are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format 
of the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an 
exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your 
feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding the contents or 
accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

GAO-11-167R: 

United States Government Accountability Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

December 13, 2010: 

The Honorable Byron L. Dorgan:
Chairman:
Committee on Indian Affairs:
United States Senate: 

The Honorable John Barrasso:
Vice Chairman:
Committee on Indian Affairs:
United States Senate: 

The Honorable John Thune:
United States Senate: 

Subject: U.S. Department of Justice Declinations of Indian Country 
Criminal Matters: 

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has reported that the crime rates 
experienced by American Indians are two and a half times higher than 
those experienced by the general population in the United States. 
Specifically, from 1992 to 2001 American Indians experienced violent 
crimes at a rate of 101 violent crimes per 1,000 persons annually, 
compared to the national rate of 41 per 1,000 persons. The federal 
government plays a major role in prosecuting crimes committed in 
Indian country. For example, unless a federal statute has granted the 
state jurisdiction, the federal government has exclusive jurisdiction 
to prosecute non-Indians who commit crimes against Indians in Indian 
country, while the federal government and tribal governments both have 
jurisdiction to prosecute Indian offenders who commit crimes in Indian 
country. Federal prosecution, however, carries with it the possibility 
of greater terms of imprisonment, as tribal courts are statutorily 
limited to a maximum of 3 years imprisonment per offense, regardless 
of the severity of the offense, for example, a homicide[Footnote 1]. 
Because of such jurisdictional and sentencing limitations, tribal 
communities rely on the federal government to investigate and 
prosecute a variety of crimes in Indian country. 

Members of Congress have raised questions over recent press reports 
that federal prosecutors have declined to prosecute a significant 
percentage of Indian country criminal investigations that have been 
referred to their offices, and you asked us to review this issue. This 
report addresses the following questions: 

1) How many Indian country matters were referred to U.S. Attorneys' 
offices and what were the declination rates for those matters for 
fiscal years 2005 through 2009? 

2) What are the reasons for the declinations as recorded in the 
Department of Justice's case management system? 

To determine U.S. Attorney declination rates and the reasons for those 
declinations, we reviewed violent and nonviolent criminal matters from 
Indian country in DOJ's case management system, the Legal Information 
Office Network System (LIONS). Specifically, we consolidated records 
provided for fiscal years 2005 through 2009, the 5 most recent years 
of data available for violent and nonviolent crimes, into a single 
data set and analyzed the data to determine declination rates for 
Indian country matters. However, LIONS does not contain data on all 
criminal matters in Indian country. Specifically, Indian country 
matters may be categorized in LIONS as something other than "Indian 
country," and crimes committed in Indian country that are not referred 
to a U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO), for instance, crimes over which 
the state has jurisdiction, are not recorded in LIONS.[Footnote 2] We 
interviewed cognizant DOJ officials about the data entry process for 
new matters, performed electronic testing for obvious errors in 
accuracy and completeness of the data, and reviewed LIONS 
documentation to determine that the data in LIONS was sufficiently 
reliable for the purpose of our review. We also interviewed staff from 
4 of the 94 USAOs that had among the largest volumes of Indian country 
referrals from fiscal years 2005 through 2009. Since we selected a 
nonprobability sample of USAOs to interview, the information we 
obtained is not generalizable to all USAOs.[Footnote 3] However, the 
interviews provided insights into the factors that may contribute to 
the difference in declination rates for various types of criminal 
offenses. 

We conducted our work from October 2009 through December 2010 in 
accordance with all sections of GAO's Quality Assurance Framework that 
are relevant to our objectives.[Footnote 4] The framework requires 
that we plan and perform the engagement to obtain sufficient and 
appropriate evidence to meet our stated objectives and to discuss any 
limitations in our work. We believe that the information and data 
obtained and the analysis conducted provide a reasonable basis for any 
findings and conclusions in this product. See enclosure I for a more 
detailed discussion of our scope and methodology. 

Results in Brief: 

In fiscal years 2005 through 2009, USAOs resolved about 9,000 of the 
approximately 10,000 Indian country matters referred to their offices 
by filing for prosecution,[Footnote 5] declining to prosecute, or 
administratively closing the matter.[Footnote 6] USAOs declined to 
prosecute 50 percent of the 9,000 matters. In addition: 

* About 77 percent of the matters received were categorized as violent 
crimes, and 24 percent as nonviolent crimes. 

* Declination rates tended to be higher for violent crimes, which were 
declined 52 percent of the time, than for nonviolent crimes, which 
were declined 40 percent of the time. According to staff from the 
USAOs, the difference in declination rates may be related to the 
evidence that is generally available for each type of crime, because, 
generally, less evidence is available for violent crimes. 

* South Dakota and Arizona were the top two districts receiving Indian 
country matters, with 2,414 and 2,358 matters, respectively. 

* The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and Bureau of Indian 
Affairs (BIA) were the most prominent referring agencies, with 5,500 
and 2,355 matters referred, respectively. Matters referred by the FBI 
were declined 46 percent of the time by the USAO, and matters from BIA 
63 percent of the time. According to USAO, FBI, and BIA officials, 
this may be attributed to differences in the types of crimes 
investigated by the two agencies and the agencies' policies on which 
matters to refer to USAOs. 

* Two charge categories accounted for 55 percent of matters referred. 
There were 2,922 assault matters received (29 percent of the total), 
while the other leading charge was sexual abuse and related offenses, 
with 2,594 matters received (26 percent of the total). USAOs declined 
to prosecute 46 percent of assault matters and 67 percent of sexual 
abuse and related matters. 

The Department of Justice's case management system, LIONS, cited 32 
possible reasons associated with declinations of Indian country 
matters. Three of those reasons were associated with 65 percent of the 
declinations. They were "weak or insufficient admissible evidence" (42 
percent), "no federal offense evident" (18 percent), and "witness 
problems" (12 percent).[Footnote 7] 

Background: 

Crimes committed in Indian country may be under the jurisdiction of 
federal, state, or tribal governments depending on (1) the identity of 
the offender and victim--that is, Indian or non-Indian, (2) the nature 
of the alleged crime, (3) the state in which the alleged crime 
occurred, and (4) whether the crime was committed in Indian country as 
defined by federal statute.[Footnote 8] Depending on the specific 
combination of factors in a given crime, the U.S. Attorneys may have 
jurisdiction to prosecute crimes committed in Indian country.[Footnote 
9] 

The USAO intake process for Indian country criminal matters begins 
when a law enforcement agency presents an investigation for possible 
prosecution. Most Indian country crimes are investigated and presented 
to the USAO by a tribal law enforcement agency, the FBI, or by 
criminal investigators from BIA. USAOs refer to all criminal 
investigations referred to them as "matters," and categorize them as 
"violent" or "nonviolent" depending on the nature of the alleged 
crime.[Footnote 10] DOJ officials noted that receipt of a referral 
does not mean that a prosecutable case exists at the time the referral 
is made. Upon further investigation, USAOs may file the matter for 
prosecution as a case in court or decline to prosecute the matter. 
[Footnote 11] When declining to prosecute a criminal matter, USAOs 
categorize the declination as an immediate declination or a later 
declination. An immediate declination occurs when the USAO does not 
open a file on a referral and does not pursue prosecution of the 
referral. A later declination occurs when the USAO opens a file on the 
referral, conducts more work on the matter than would be associated 
with an immediate declination, but ultimately does not pursue 
prosecution of the referral. Unless otherwise noted, we have combined 
immediate and later declinations into a single declination category in 
our analysis. The intake process for Indian country matters referred 
to USAOs is illustrated in figure 1 below. 

Figure 1: Prosecution or Declination Process for Indian Country 
Matters Referred to a USAO: 

[Refer to PDF for image: illustration] 

Law enforcement agency refers Indian country criminal Investigation to 
USAO: 

USAO reviews matter and	works with investigative agency to determine 
whether further Investigation is needed: 

USAO determines whether to file a case in court or decline the matter 
for prosecution. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ information. 

[End of figure] 

USAOs Declined to Prosecute 50 Percent of the More Than 9,000 Matters 
Received in Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009 That Were Resolved: 

Approximately 10,000 Indian country matters were referred to USAOs in 
fiscal years 2005 through 2009, and USAOs declined to prosecute 50 
percent of the more than 9,000 matters that were resolved. As of 
September 30, 2009, about 1,000 of the total matters received were 
considered pending because a USAO had not yet decided to file for 
prosecution, decline, or administratively close the matter.[Footnote 
12] Of the matters received, about 77 percent were categorized as 
violent crimes, and 24 percent as nonviolent crimes. Annual matters 
received for violent and nonviolent crime, as well as filing and 
declination information for those matters, are shown in table 1, below. 

Table 1: Indian Country Matters Received, Fiscal Years 2005 through 
2009: 

Fiscal year: 2005; 
Matters received: Violent[A]: 1,876; 
Matters received: Nonviolent[A]: 479; 
Matters received: Total received: 2,342; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Filed for prosecution[B]: 
977; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Immediately declined: 663; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Later declined: 682; 
Not yet filed for prosecution or declined: 20. 

Fiscal year: 2006; 
Matters received: Violent[A]: 1,483; 
Matters received: Nonviolent[A]: 472; 
Matters received: Total received: 1,947; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Filed for prosecution[B]: 
858; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Immediately declined: 495; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Later declined: 546; 
Not yet filed for prosecution or declined: 48. 

Fiscal year: 2007; 
Matters received: Violent[A]: 1,488; 
Matters received: Nonviolent[A]: 489; 
Matters received: Total received: 1,963; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Filed for prosecution[B]: 
1,018; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Immediately declined: 331; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Later declined: 544; 
Not yet filed for prosecution or declined: 70. 

Fiscal year: 2008; 
Matters received: Violent[A]: 1,491; 
Matters received: Nonviolent[A]: 501; 
Matters received: Total received: 1,987; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Filed for prosecution[B]: 
975; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Immediately declined: 323; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Later declined: 472; 
Not yet filed for prosecution or declined: 217. 

Fiscal year: 2009; 
Matters received: Violent[A]: 1,342; 
Matters received: Nonviolent[A]: 429; 
Matters received: Total received: 1,767; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Filed for prosecution[B]: 
756; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Immediately declined: 201; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Later declined: 249; 
Not yet filed for prosecution or declined: 561. 

Fiscal year: Total; 
Matters received: Violent[A]: 7,680; 
Matters received: Nonviolent[A]: 2,370; 
Matters received: Total received: 10,006; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Filed for prosecution[B]: 
4,584; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Immediately declined: 2,013; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined: Later declined: 2,493; 
Not yet filed for prosecution or declined: 916. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Some matters are categorized as both violent and nonviolent. 
Therefore, the sum of the violent and nonviolent categories exceeds 
the total received. 

[B] "Filed for prosecution" includes matters that were not declined, 
but were closed in LIONS for administrative reasons. These 
administratively closed matters include, for instance, matters that 
were combined with another matter for prosecution and were, therefore, 
not declined. 

[End of table] 

The overall declination rate for Indian country matters was 50 percent 
for fiscal years 2005 through 2009, as shown in table 2, below. Note 
that trends cannot be discerned by comparing individual years because 
more matters were pending for recent fiscal years than for earlier 
fiscal years. 

Table 2: Indian Country Matters Declined, Violent and Nonviolent 
Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009. 

Fiscal year: 2005; 
Matters received: 2,342; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 2,322; 
Matters declined: 1,345; 
Declination rate[B]: 58%. 

Fiscal year: 2006; 
Matters received: 1,947; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 1,899; 
Matters declined: 1,041; 
Declination rate[B]: 55%. 

Fiscal year: 2007; 
Matters received: 1,963; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 1,893; 
Matters declined: 875; 
Declination rate[B]: 46%. 

Fiscal year: 2008; 
Matters received: 1,987; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 1,770; 
Matters declined: 795; 
Declination rate[B]: 45%. 

Fiscal year: 2009; 
Matters received: 1,767; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 1,206; 
Matters declined: 450; 
Declination rate[B]: 37%. 

Fiscal year: Overall; 
Matters received: 10,006; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 9,090; 
Matters declined: 4,506; 
Declination rate[B]: 50%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] "Filed for prosecution" includes matters that were not declined, 
but were closed in LIONS for administrative reasons. These 
administratively closed matters include, for instance, matters that 
were combined with another matter for prosecution and were, therefore, 
not declined. 

[B] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. Trends cannot be discerned by comparing individual 
years because more matters were pending for recent fiscal years than 
for earlier fiscal years. As these pending matters are closed, the 
declination rates may change, particularly for recent fiscal years. 

[End of table] 

Overall, declination rates tend to be higher for violent crimes, which 
were declined 52 percent of the time in fiscal years 2005 through 
2009, than for nonviolent crimes, which were declined 40 percent of 
the time, as shown in tables 3 and 4 below. 

Table 3: Indian Country Matters Declined, Violent Crimes, Fiscal Years 
2005 through 2009. 

Fiscal year: 2005; 
Matters received: 1,876; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 1,864; 
Matters declined: 1,095; 
Declination rate[B]: 59%. 

Fiscal year: 2006; 
Matters received: 1,483; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 1,454; 
Matters declined: 805; 
Declination rate[B]: 55%. 

Fiscal year: 2007; 
Matters received: 1,488; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 1,434; 
Matters declined: 732; 
Declination rate[B]: 51%. 

Fiscal year: 2008; 
Matters received: 1,491; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 1,343; 
Matters declined: 669; 
Declination rate[B]: 50%. 

Fiscal year: 2009; 
Matters received: 1,342; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 898; 
Matters declined: 370; 
Declination rate[B]: 41%. 

Fiscal year: Overall; 
Matters received: 7,680; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 6,993; 
Matters declined: 3,671; 
Declination rate[B]: 52%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] "Filed for prosecution" includes matters that were not declined, 
but were closed in LIONS for administrative reasons. These 
administratively closed matters include, for instance, matters that 
were combined with another matter for prosecution and were, therefore, 
not declined. 

[B] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. Trends cannot be discerned by comparing individual 
years because more matters were pending for recent fiscal years than 
for earlier fiscal years. As these pending matters are closed, the 
declination rates may change, particularly for recent fiscal years. 

[End of table] 

Table 4: Indian Country Matters Declined, Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal 
Years 2005 through 2009. 

Matters received; Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]; 
Matters declined; Declination rate[B]. 

Fiscal year: 2005; 
Matters received: 479; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 471; 
Matters declined: 256; 
Declination rate[B]: 54%. 

Fiscal year: 2006; 
Matters received: 472; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 453; 
Matters declined: 240; 
Declination rate[B]: 53%. 

Fiscal year: 2007; 
Matters received: 489; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 473; 
Matters declined: 152; 
Declination rate[B]: 32%. 

Fiscal year: 2008; 
Matters received: 501; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 431; 
Matters declined: 126; 
Declination rate[B]: 29%. 

Fiscal year: 2009; 
Matters received: 429; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 311; 
Matters declined: 80; 
Declination rate[B]: 26%. 

Fiscal year: Overall; 
Matters received: 2,370; 
Matters filed for prosecution or declined[A]: 2,139; 
Matters declined: 854; 
Declination rate[B]: 40%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] "Filed for prosecution" includes matters that were not declined, 
but were closed in LIONS for administrative reasons. These 
administratively closed matters include, for instance, matters that 
were combined with another matter for prosecution and were, therefore, 
not declined. 

[B] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. Trends cannot be discerned by comparing individual 
years because more matters were pending for recent fiscal years than 
for earlier fiscal years. As these pending matters are closed, the 
declination rates may change, particularly for recent fiscal years. 

[End of table] 

According to staff from the USAOs with whom we spoke, the difference 
in declination rates may reflect the amount and quality of evidence 
that is often available for each type of crime. Nonviolent crimes, 
such as the illegal sale of alcohol, tend to have more witnesses, 
while other nonviolent crimes such as fraud leave more of a "paper 
trail" than violent crimes. Violent crimes, however, frequently occur 
outside the presence of witnesses, other than a typically fragile 
victim--for example, a child or a victim of domestic violence or 
sexual abuse--and lack documentary evidence. Furthermore, victims of 
violent crime may not have seen their attacker, may be too frightened 
to testify against him or her in court, or may have some form of 
domestic relationship with the suspect causing them to be unwilling to 
testify in court. The lack of evidence available for violent crimes 
tends to make them more difficult to prove and, therefore, may result 
in an increased rate of declination. 

Five USAO Districts Account for 73 Percent of All Indian Country 
Criminal Matters Received: 

Fifty-one of the 94 USAO districts received Indian country matters 
from fiscal years 2005 through 2009, although 5 districts account for 
73 percent of all Indian country criminal matters received, as shown 
in figure 2 below. 

Figure 2: Indian Country Matters Received by USAO District, Violent 
and Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: pie-chart] 

South Dakota: 2,414; 24%; 
Arizona: 2,358; 24%; 
New Mexico: 912; 9%; 
Montana: 844; 8%; 
North Dakota: 790; 8%; 
All other districts: 2,688; 27%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[End of figure] 

After North Dakota, which received 790 Indian country matters from 
fiscal years 2005 through 2009 and ranked fifth in the number of 
Indian country criminal matters received, the district with the next 
largest number of receipts was the Western District of Oklahoma with 
301 matters. Twenty-six districts received between 1 and 10 Indian 
country matters over the period. 

For more detail on the number of matters received and declination 
rates by USAO district, please see enclosure II, tables 7, 8 and 9. 

Seventy-Nine Percent of Indian Country Matters Were Referred to USAOs 
by the FBI or BIA: 

The FBI and the BIA referred 79 percent of the Indian country matters 
to the USAOs. The FBI accounted for 55 percent of the total referrals, 
while the BIA accounted for 24 percent. Tribal law enforcement, the 
BIA, and the FBI share responsibility for investigating federal 
offenses in Indian country; however, the LIONS database does not 
contain a category specifically for referrals from tribal law 
enforcement authorities. DOJ officials told us that USAOs generally 
categorize referrals from tribal authorities under the "state/county/ 
municipal authorities" category or the "other" category, and that 
categorization practices differ between districts. Figure 3, below, 
shows the number of Indian country matters received by USAOs by 
referring agency from fiscal years 2005 through 2009. 

Figure 3: Indian Country Matters Received by Referring Agency, Violent 
and Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: pie-chart] 

Federal Bureau of Investigation: 5,500; 55%; 
Bureau of Indian Affairs: 2,355; 24%; 
State/county/municipal authorities: 665; 7%; 
Other: 477; 5%; 
All other referring agencies: 1,009; 10%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

Note: "State/county/municipal authorities" and "Other" categories may 
include tribal authorities. "Other" is a category in LIONS to track 
all other agencies that do not have a separate category in the 
database. "All other referring agencies" combines several smaller 
LIONS categories in our analysis. Percentages do not add to 100 due to 
rounding. 

[End of figure] 

USAOs declined 63 percent of Indian country criminal matters referred 
by the BIA and 46 percent of Indian country criminal matters referred 
by the FBI. Representatives from USAOs, BIA, and FBI told us that this 
difference in declination rates may be the result of differences in 
agency protocols for referring matters to a USAO. For example, while 
FBI officials said that they may elect not to refer matters that they 
believe lack sufficient evidence for prosecution, BIA officials said 
that they refer all matters that they investigate to the USAO. Also, 
one agency may not have a presence in a certain area, leaving the 
other to make all of the referrals to the USAO. For example, the FBI 
does not have a presence on some tribal land in Arizona, and so 
criminal matters from that area are referred by the BIA. Furthermore, 
FBI officials noted that in many districts USAO guidelines assign 
primary responsibility for investigation of certain types of crimes to 
either the FBI or the BIA. For example, the FBI may be primarily 
responsible for crimes with child victims while the BIA may be 
responsible for adult rape investigations. These differences in agency 
protocols for referring matters to a USAO, presence in certain areas 
of Indian country, and investigative responsibilities may affect the 
declination rates for the matters referred by the BIA and the FBI. 

For more detail on the number of matters received and declination 
rates by referring agency for violent and nonviolent crimes, see 
enclosure II, tables 10, 11 and 12. 

Assault and Sexual Abuse Charges Accounted for 55 Percent of Indian 
Country Matters Received: 

Assault and sexual abuse charges were the leading types of charges in 
Indian country and accounted for 55 percent of Indian country matters 
in LIONS, as shown in figure 4 below. 

Figure 4: Indian Country Matters Received by Charge, Violent and 
Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

[Refer to PDF for image: pie-chart] 

Assault: 2,922; 29%; 
Sexual abuse and related offenses: 2,594; 26%; 
Drug offenses: 739; 7%; 
Offenses involving theft or deceit: 739; 7%; 
Homicide, including attempts: 626; 6%; 
Unspecified Indian country offenses: 445; 4%; 
Firearms, explosives and related offenses: 355; 4%; 
All other charge categories: 1,586; 16%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

Note: We used the category "Unspecified Indian country offenses" where 
the LIONS data did not include a specific charged offense but 
indicated that the alleged criminal conduct took place in Indian 
country. "All other charge categories" includes specific charges not 
included in this figure and pending matters where DOJ had not yet 
decided whether to charge or decline to prosecute. Percentages do not 
add to 100 due to rounding. 

[End of figure] 

Of the two leading Indian country crime charge categories, USAOs 
declined to prosecute 67 percent of sexual abuse and related matters 
and declined to prosecute 46 percent of assault matters. USAO 
officials told us that the difference in declination rates between 
sexual abuse and assault matters may be the result of the difficulty 
in obtaining evidence and witnesses in sexual abuse investigations. 
For example, victims in sexual abuse crimes may not notify law 
enforcement officials of the crime until long after it occurred, 
making the collection of nontestimonial, physical evidence difficult 
or impossible. In addition, sexual assault victims may be unwilling to 
testify against a perpetrator in court, particularly if they know the 
perpetrator and are facing pressure not to testify. USAO officials 
also noted that child victims, in particular, may have difficulty 
testifying in court against their abuser or experience difficulty in 
articulating what crimes were committed. In these instances, the 
matter would likely have to be declined. 

For more detail on the number of matters received and declination 
rates by charge for violent and nonviolent crimes, see enclosure II, 
tables 13, 14, and 15. 

Reasons for Declinations Varied, but "Weak or Insufficient Evidence" 
Was the Most Frequently Cited: 

There were 32 possible declination reasons that could be selected in 
LIONS and were associated with Indian country criminal matters, 
[Footnote 13] and 5 of the reasons were associated with 83 percent of 
the declinations.[Footnote 14] "Weak or insufficient admissible 
evidence" was the reason most frequently associated with declinations, 
as shown in table 5 below. 

Table 5: Frequency of Declination Reasons, Violent and Nonviolent 
Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

Declination reason: Weak or insufficient admissible evidence; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 42%. 

Declination reason: No federal offense evident[B]; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 18%. 

Declination reason: Witness problems; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 12%. 

Declination reason: Lack of evidence of criminal intent; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 10%. 

Declination reason: Suspect to be prosecuted by other authorities; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 10%. 

Declination reason: All other declination reasons; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 26%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Up to three reasons may be associated with a declination, 
therefore the sum of percentages exceeds 100. 

[B] "No Federal Offense Evident" may include matters declined because 
of jurisdictional issues. 

[End of table] 

DOJ officials have stated that lack of jurisdiction precludes USAO 
prosecution of certain Indian country crimes. For example, if a non- 
Indian commits a crime in Indian country and the victim of the crime 
is also non-Indian, the state rather than the federal government would 
have jurisdiction to prosecute. However, "Jurisdiction or Venue 
Problems" was cited in only 2 percent of declinations. At the same 
time, the selection of reasons for a declination is subject to the 
prosecutor's discretion and, according to DOJ officials, a prosecutor 
could choose to use an alternate reason, such as "No Federal Offense 
Evident," when jurisdiction or venue problems occur. "No Federal 
Offense Evident" accounted for 18 percent of the declination reasons, 
as shown in the table above. It is unknown what percentage of these 
cases may have been declined because the federal government lacked 
jurisdiction or because the conduct did not meet other elements of the 
crime. 

For a list of all of the reasons associated with declinations of 
Indian country matters, see enclosure II, tables 16, 17, and 18. 

We provided a draft of this report to DOJ for review and comment. 
Their comments are reproduced in enclosure III. DOJ provided 
additional perspectives on the reasons why USAOs may decline to 
prosecute a criminal matter, and on their efforts to address public 
safety challenges in Indian country. DOJ also provided technical 
comments that we have incorporated where appropriate. 

We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional 
committees. We are also sending copies to the Attorney General of the 
United States and the Secretary of the Interior. This report will also 
be available at no charge on our Web site at [hyperlink, 
http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you or your staff have questions concerning this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-9627 or maurerd@gao.gov. Contact points for 
our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found 
on the last page of this report. Key contributors to this report are 
listed in enclosure IV. 

Signed by: 

David C. Maurer:
Director, Homeland Security and Justice: 

Enclosures (4): 

[End of section] 

Enclosure I: Scope and Methodology: 

To determine U.S. Attorney declination rates and the reasons for those 
declinations, we reviewed violent and nonviolent criminal matters from 
Indian country in the Department of Justice's (DOJ) case management 
system, the Legal Information Office Network System (LIONS). 
Specifically, we consolidated records provided from fiscal years 2005 
through 2009, the 5 most recent years of data available for violent 
and nonviolent crimes, into a single data set and analyzed the data to 
determine declination rates for Indian country matters. We considered 
a matter to be not declined if any one defendant was prosecuted, even 
if the USAO had declined to prosecute other defendants or had 
previously declined the matter. 

We also interviewed cognizant DOJ officials about the intake and data 
entry process for Indian country matters, performed electronic testing 
for obvious errors in accuracy and completeness of the data, and 
reviewed LIONS documentation to determine that the data we used were 
sufficiently reliable for the purposes of our review. Nevertheless, 
certain limitations apply to the Indian country data in LIONS because 
the system is designed for case management and not primarily for 
statistical analysis. Specifically, Indian country matters may be 
categorized in LIONS as something other than "Indian country." For 
example, a firearms offense involving Indians in Indian country may be 
categorized only as a firearms matter. Further, crimes committed in 
Indian country that are not referred to a U.S. Attorney's Office 
(USAO), for instance, crimes over which the state has jurisdiction, 
are not recorded in LIONS. Therefore, LIONS does not contain data on 
all criminal investigations in Indian country. Moreover, the manner in 
which LIONS is used in individual offices may vary over time in a way 
that could affect the declination rate, even without changes in Indian 
country crime frequency or prosecution practices. For example, DOJ 
officials told us that prior to 2007, the South Dakota USAO opened 
matters in LIONS to keep information about offenders for possible use 
if the offenders were later arrested for a prosecutable federal 
offense. Starting in 2007, the South Dakota USAO changed its LIONS 
practices and no longer entered those matters in LIONS, which would 
have the effect of decreasing that office's declination rate. 

In addition, we interviewed staff from 4 of the 94 USAOs that had 
among the largest volumes of Indian country matters from fiscal years 
2005 through 2009, the period for which we calculated declination 
rates. Since we selected a nonprobability sample of USAOs to 
interview, the information we obtained is not generalizable to all 
USAOs.[Footnote 15] However, the interviews provided insights into the 
factors that may contribute to the difference in declination rates for 
various types of criminal matters. 

We calculated the declination rate for a given fiscal year as the 
proportion of resolved matters received in that year that were 
declined at any time during the five year period. A resolved matter is 
one that the USAO has decided to file for prosecution, decline, or 
administratively close. For example, we looked at the Indian country 
matters that USAOs received in fiscal year 2006, and then determined 
what percentage of the resolved matters were filed for prosecution or 
administratively closed and what percentage were declined. If a matter 
was received in fiscal year 2006 and was immediately declined, it was 
included in the declination rate. Similarly, if a matter was received 
in fiscal year 2006 and was declined in fiscal year 2008, it was also 
included in the declination rate for fiscal year 2006 matters. Matters 
that USAOs had not yet resolved--that is, decided to file for 
prosecution, decline, or administratively close--were not included in 
the declination rate. 

This approach for calculating declination rates contrasts with an 
alternate method that has been used by DOJ, in which the number of 
matters that were received in a given fiscal year is compared with the 
number of matters declined in that same year. Under this approach, a 
matter received in 2006 and declined in 2008 would be included in the 
2008 declination rate. Furthermore, a matter received in 2008, but 
which was not filed for prosecution or declined, would also be 
included in the calculation of the 2008 declination rate. This 
approach is useful for describing the level of activity related to 
matters in a given fiscal year, one of the purposes for which DOJ uses 
the LIONS system, but does not reflect what happened to a matter over 
time. 

In determining the declination rates by charge, we grouped Indian 
country matters into 19 broad charge categories, listed below in table 
6. These categories reflect the lead charge assigned by a prosecutor 
at intake to indicate the most significant crime alleged. 

Table 6: Charge Categories for Indian Country Criminal Matters. 

Charge category: Conservation and environmental offenses; 
Description of charge category: Violations of resource conservation 
laws contained in Title 16 of the U.S. Code, such as laws protecting 
National Parks, forests, archeological resources, historic properties, 
fish, wildlife, and marine mammals; laws protecting public lands 
(Title 18, Chapter 91); water pollution control laws (Title 33, 
Chapter 26), and unlawful hunting, trapping, or fishing on Indian land 
(18 U.S.C. § 1165). 

Charge category: Offenses involving theft or deceit; 
Description of charge category: Violations of 17 U.S.C. Chapter 5 
(copyright infringement), and 18 U.S.C. Chapter 9 (bankruptcy fraud), 
Chapter 11 (bribery, graft, and conflicts of interest), Chapter 11a 
(failure to pay child support), Chapter 25 (counterfeiting and 
forgery), Chapter 31 (embezzlement and theft), Chapter 42 
(extortionate credit transactions), Chapter 47 (fraud and false 
statements), Chapter 63 (mail and other fraud), Chapter 75 (passport 
and visa fraud), Chapter 103 (robbery and burglary), Chapter 107 
(stowaways), Chapter 113 (stolen property), Chapter 114 (trafficking 
in tobacco contraband), and 26 U.S.C. Chapter 75 (tax offenses), and 
certain Indian-related theft offenses, i.e., 18 U.S.C. § 1163 
(embezzlement and theft from tribal organizations), 18 U.S.C. § 1167 
(theft from gaming establishments in Indian country), and 18 U.S.C. § 
1168 (theft by officers or employees of gaming establishments on 
Indian lands). 

Charge category: Obstruction of justice offenses; 
Description of charge category: Violations of 18 U.S.C. § 4 
(concealment of a felony), 18 U.S.C. §§ 371-372 (conspiring to commit 
an offense against the United States or its officers), 18 U.S.C. § 
1169 (failure to report child abuse in Indian country), as well as any 
offenses within the following Chapters of Title 18: Chapter 21 
(contempt), Chapter 35 (escape from custody), Chapter 49 (fugitives 
from justice), Chapter 73 (obstruction of justice), Chapter 75 
(perjury), Chapter 207 (release and detention pending judicial 
proceedings), Chapter 224 (protection of witnesses), Chapter 227 
(sentences), and chapter 229 (post-sentence administration). 

Charge category: Controlled substance offenses; 
Description of charge category: Violations of the Controlled 
Substances Act of 1970, which is found in Title 21 of the United 
States Code, as well as violations of the alcohol prohibitions 
applicable to Indian country under Title 18, Chapter 53 (18 U.S.C. § 
1154-1156). 

Charge category: Firearms, explosives, and related offenses; 
Description of charge category: Violations of 18 U.S.C. Chapter 5 
(arson), Chapter 40 (explosives), chapter 44 (firearms), and 26 U.S.C. 
Chapter 53 (certain firearms and destructive devices). 

Charge category: Sexual abuse and related offenses; 
Description of charge category: Violations of 18 U.S.C. Chapter 109A 
(sexual abuse), Chapter 109B (sex offender registration requirements), 
Chapter 110 (child pornography), and Chapter 117 (involving 
transportation of the victim for illegal sexual activity). 

Charge category: Immigration offenses; 
Description of charge category: Encompasses the general immigration 
penalty provisions (8 U.S.C. §§ 1324-1330). 

Charge category: Property damage or trespass offenses; 
Description of charge category: Violations of 18 U.S.C. Chapter 65 
(malicious mischief) and trespass offenses such as 18 U.S.C. § 1793, 
trespass on Bureau of Prisons land. 

Charge category: Gambling offenses; 
Description of charge category: Violations of the following U.S. Code 
provisions: 15 U.S.C. § 1175, gambling devices prohibited and 18 
U.S.C. § 1084, transmission of wagering information. 

Charge category: Racketeering offenses; 
Description of charge category: Violations of 18 U.S.C. chapter 95, 
including 18 U.S.C. § 1951, interference with commerce by threats or 
violence; 18 U.S.C. § 1952, interstate and foreign travel or 
transportation in aid of racketeering enterprises; 18 U.S.C. § 1955, 
prohibition of illegal gambling businesses; 18 U.S.C. § 1956, 
laundering of monetary instruments; 18 U.S.C. § 1958, use of 
interstate commerce facilities in murder-for-hire; and 18 U.S.C. § 
1959, violent crimes in aid of racketeering activity. 

Charge category: Homicide, including attempts; 
Description of charge category: Violations of 18 U.S.C. chapter 51 
(homicide). The offenses within this chapter include murder, 
manslaughter, and attempted murder or manslaughter, among other things. 

Charge category: Assault; 
Description of charge category: Violations of 18 U.S.C. Chapter 7. 
Within this category, assaults may range from simple assault, which is 
a misdemeanor with a maximum prison exposure of 6 months, to assault 
with intent to commit murder, which is a felony punishable by up to 20 
years imprisonment. 

Charge category: Offenses involving threats, force or violence; 
Description of charge category: Violations of 18 U.S.C. Chapter 41 
(extortion and threats), Chapter 55 (kidnapping), Chapter 90A 
(protection of unborn children), and Chapter 110A (domestic violence 
and stalking). 

Charge category: Civil rights offenses; 
Description of charge category: Violations of 18 U.S.C. Chapter 13, 
which addresses criminal violations of civil rights, such as 
conspiracy to injure citizens in the exercise of federal rights (18 
U.S.C. § 241); willful deprivations of federal rights under color of 
law (18 U.S.C. § 242); and interference with federally protected 
activities (18 U.S.C. § 245). 

Charge category: Unspecified Indian country offenses; 
Description of charge category: Encompasses LIONS charge values that 
correspond with the following Indian country provisions: 18 U.S.C. § 
1151, which defines the term "Indian country," 18 U.S.C. § 1152, which 
establishes federal jurisdiction to prosecute a wide variety of crimes 
in Indian country such as arson, theft, receiving stolen goods, 
destruction of property, and robbery, provided that either the 
offender or the victim is an Indian, and 18 U.S.C. § 1153, which 
establishes federal jurisdiction to prosecute a wide variety of crimes 
committed by Indians in Indian country, such murder, manslaughter, 
kidnapping, maiming, incest, felony assault, felony child and a host 
of sex crimes. Because of the wide array of criminal conduct 
represented by these charge codes, it is not possible to identify the 
specific underlying offense, only that the offense charged was 
committed in Indian country. 

Charge category: Juvenile delinquency matters; 
Description of charge category: Encompassed by 18 U.S.C., Chapter 403, 
which involves violations of federal law committed by persons younger 
than 18 years old. 

Charge category: Postal Service offenses; 
Description of charge category: Violations of law applicable to the 
Postal Service, which are contained in 18 U.S.C. Chapter 83. 

Charge category: Pending matters; 
Description of charge category: Matters where DOJ had not yet decided 
whether to charge or decline to prosecute. 

Charge category: Unknown offenses; 
Description of charge category: Encompasses: (1) LIONS charge values 
for which we were unable to find an associated criminal provision in 
the U.S. Code; and (2) LIONS charge values that corresponded with a 
general provision in the U.S. Code such as 18 U.S.C. § 3, accessory 
after the fact, but did not identify the underlying offense, such as 
accessory after the fact to murder. 

Source: GAO. 

[End of table] 

We conducted our work from October 2009 through December 2010 in 
accordance with all sections of GAO's Quality Assurance Framework that 
are relevant to our objectives.[Footnote 16] The framework requires 
that we plan and perform the engagement to obtain sufficient and 
appropriate evidence to meet our stated objectives and to discuss any 
limitations in our work. We believe that the information and data 
obtained and the analysis conducted provide a reasonable basis for any 
findings and conclusions in this product. 

[End of Enclosure I] 

Enclosure II: Indian Country Matters Received and Declination Rates: 

Tables 7, 8, and 9, below, show the number of Indian country matters 
received and declination rates by U.S. Attorney's Office (USAO) 
district from fiscal years 2005 through 2009. Table 7 includes both 
violent and nonviolent criminal matters, table 8 shows only violent 
criminal matters, and table 9 shows only nonviolent criminal matters. 

Declination rates are calculated based on the number of matters 
actually filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed 
by the district office. Declination rates do not include matters that 
were still "pending," that is, that had not yet been filed for 
prosecution, declined or administratively closed. We did not calculate 
declination rates for districts with fewer than 50 matters filed for 
prosecution, declined or administratively closed from fiscal years 
2005 through 2009 because a declination rate would have little meaning 
when based on such a small number of matters. 

Table 7: Indian Country Matters Received and Declination Rates by USAO 
District, Violent and Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 
2009: 

USAO district: South Dakota; 
Matters received: 2,414; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
2,241; 
Matters declined: 1,376; 
Declination rate[A]: 61%. 

USAO district: Arizona; 
Matters received: 2,358; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
2,178; 
Matters declined: 817; 
Declination rate[A]: 38%. 

USAO district: New Mexico; 
Matters received: 912; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
746; 
Matters declined: 301; 
Declination rate[A]: 40%. 

USAO district: Montana; 
Matters received: 844; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
795; 
Matters declined: 376; 
Declination rate[A]: 47%. 

USAO district: North Dakota; 
Matters received: 790; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
750; 
Matters declined: 478; 
Declination rate[A]: 64%. 

USAO district: Oklahoma-Western; 
Matters received: 301; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
287; 
Matters declined: 134; 
Declination rate[A]: 47%. 

USAO district: Wyoming; 
Matters received: 225; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
194; 
Matters declined: 98; 
Declination rate[A]: 51%. 

USAO district: Idaho; 
Matters received: 217; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
200; 
Matters declined: 119; 
Declination rate[A]: 60%. 

USAO district: Washington-Eastern; 
Matters received: 199; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
183; 
Matters declined: 132; 
Declination rate[A]: 72%. 

USAO district: Nebraska; 
Matters received: 193; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
171; 
Matters declined: 76; 
Declination rate[A]: 44%. 

USAO district: Oregon; 
Matters received: 192; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
181; 
Matters declined: 122; 
Declination rate[A]: 67%. 

USAO district: Michigan-Western; 
Matters received: 164; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
139; 
Matters declined: 52; 
Declination rate[A]: 37%. 

USAO district: Nevada; 
Matters received: 163; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
151; 
Matters declined: 84; 
Declination rate[A]: 56%. 

USAO district: North Carolina-Western; 
Matters received: 131; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
125; 
Matters declined: 53; 
Declination rate[A]: 42%. 

USAO district: Colorado; 
Matters received: 119; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
106; 
Matters declined: 38; 
Declination rate[A]: 36%. 

USAO district: Mississippi-Southern; 
Matters received: 118; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 88; 
Matters declined: 30; 
Declination rate[A]: 34%. 

USAO district: Oklahoma-Eastern; 
Matters received: 93; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 66; 
Matters declined: 33; 
Declination rate[A]: 50%. 

USAO district: Minnesota; 
Matters received: 92; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 77; 
Matters declined: 28; 
Declination rate[A]: 36%. 

USAO district: Washington-Western; 
Matters received: 85; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 65; 
Matters declined: 20; 
Declination rate[A]: 31%. 

USAO district: Utah; 
Matters received: 83; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 78; 
Matters declined: 22; 
Declination rate[A]: 28%. 

USAO district: Wisconsin-Eastern; 
Matters received: 82; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 74; 
Matters declined: 16; 
Declination rate[A]: 22%. 

USAO district: Oklahoma-Northern; 
Matters received: 78; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 65; 
Matters declined: 35; 
Declination rate[A]: 54%. 

USAO district: Alaska; 
Matters received: 47; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 42; 
Matters declined: 20; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Michigan-Eastern; 
Matters received: 30; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 26; 
Matters declined: 19; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Iowa-Northern; 
Matters received: 12; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 12; 
Matters declined: 6; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Alabama-Middle; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 5; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Connecticut; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 4; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: California-Southern; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 4; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: California-Northern; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: New York-Northern; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: California-Eastern; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: New York-Western; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Florida Southern; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Louisiana-Western; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Alabama-Southern; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Texas-Southern; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Virginia-Eastern; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Wisconsin-Western; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Maine; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Iowa-Southern; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: District of Columbia; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Missouri-Eastern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Ohio-Southern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Pennsylvania-Western; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Rhode Island; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Alabama-Northern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: California-Central; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Maryland; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Puerto Rico; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Tennessee-Western; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Pennsylvania-Eastern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 0; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Overall; 
Matters received: 10,006; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
9,090; 
Matters declined: 4,506; 
Declination rate[A]: 50%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. 

[End of table] 

Table 8: Indian Country Matters Received and Declination Rates by USAO 
District, Violent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

USAO district: South Dakota; 
Matters received: 1,808; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
1,689; 
Matters declined: 1,094; 
Declination rate[A]: 65%. 

USAO district: Arizona; 
Matters received: 1,766; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
1,602; 
Matters declined: 746; 
Declination rate[A]: 47%. 

USAO district: New Mexico; 
Matters received: 907; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
744; 
Matters declined: 300; 
Declination rate[A]: 40%. 

USAO district: North Dakota; 
Matters received: 692; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
660; 
Matters declined: 410; 
Declination rate[A]: 62%. 

USAO district: Montana; 
Matters received: 646; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
622; 
Matters declined: 292; 
Declination rate[A]: 47%. 

USAO district: Idaho; 
Matters received: 189; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
174; 
Matters declined: 100; 
Declination rate[A]: 57%. 

USAO district: Wyoming; 
Matters received: 188; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
164; 
Matters declined: 79; 
Declination rate[A]: 48%. 

USAO district: Nebraska; 
Matters received: 174; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
155; 
Matters declined: 69; 
Declination rate[A]: 45%. 

USAO district: Oregon; 
Matters received: 166; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
157; 
Matters declined: 103; 
Declination rate[A]: 66%. 

USAO district: Washington-Eastern; 
Matters received: 161; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
149; 
Matters declined: 103; 
Declination rate[A]: 69%. 

USAO district: Oklahoma-Western; 
Matters received: 125; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
122; 
Matters declined: 77; 
Declination rate[A]: 63%. 

USAO district: North Carolina-Western; 
Matters received: 115; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
114; 
Matters declined: 46; 
Declination rate[A]: 40%. 

USAO district: Nevada; 
Matters received: 115; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
106; 
Matters declined: 63; 
Declination rate[A]: 59%. 

USAO district: Michigan-Western; 
Matters received: 101; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 82; 
Matters declined: 33; 
Declination rate[A]: 40%. 

USAO district: Colorado; 
Matters received: 96; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 86; 
Matters declined: 30; 
Declination rate[A]: 35%. 

USAO district: Minnesota; 
Matters received: 86; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 72; 
Matters declined: 26; 
Declination rate[A]: 36%. 

USAO district: Mississippi-Southern; 
Matters received: 76; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 59; 
Matters declined: 18; 
Declination rate[A]: 31%. 

USAO district: Utah; 
Matters received: 73; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 69; 
Matters declined: 20; 
Declination rate[A]: 29%. 

USAO district: Wisconsin-Eastern; 
Matters received: 63; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 56; 
Matters declined: 14; 
Declination rate[A]: 25%. 

USAO district: Washington-Western; 
Matters received: 50; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 37; 
Matters declined: 7; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Oklahoma-Northern; 
Matters received: 23; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 20; 
Matters declined: 12; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Oklahoma-Eastern; 
Matters received: 18; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 16; 
Matters declined: 9; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Michigan-Eastern; 
Matters received: 15; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 13; 
Matters declined: 10; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Iowa-Northern; 
Matters received: 7; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 7; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: New York-Northern; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Virginia-Eastern; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Alaska; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: California-Eastern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: District of Columbia; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Louisiana-Western; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Missouri-Eastern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: New York-Western; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Pennsylvania-Western; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Rhode Island; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Alabama-Southern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: California-Southern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Puerto Rico; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Tennessee-Western; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Florida Southern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 0; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Overall; 
Matters received: 7,680; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
6,993; 
Matters declined: 3,671; 
Declination rate[A]: 52%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. 

[End of table] 

Table 9: Indian Country Matters Received and Declination Rates by USAO 
District, Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

USAO district: South Dakota; 
Matters received: 619; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
565; 
Matters declined: 291; 
Declination rate[A]: 52%. 

USAO district: Arizona; 
Matters received: 594; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
578; 
Matters declined: 71; 
Declination rate[A]: 12%. 

USAO district: Montana; 
Matters received: 199; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
174; 
Matters declined: 84; 
Declination rate[A]: 48%. 

USAO district: Oklahoma-Western; 
Matters received: 177; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
166; 
Matters declined: 57; 
Declination rate[A]: 34%. 

USAO district: North Dakota; 
Matters received: 98; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 90; 
Matters declined: 68; 
Declination rate[A]: 76%. 

USAO district: Oklahoma-Eastern; 
Matters received: 75; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 50; 
Matters declined: 24; 
Declination rate[A]: 48%. 

USAO district: Michigan-Western; 
Matters received: 65; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 59; 
Matters declined: 19; 
Declination rate[A]: 32%. 

USAO district: Oklahoma-Northern; 
Matters received: 55; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 45; 
Matters declined: 23; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Nevada; 
Matters received: 49; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 46; 
Matters declined: 21; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Alaska; 
Matters received: 45; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 40; 
Matters declined: 20; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Wyoming; 
Matters received: 45; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 37; 
Matters declined: 22; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Mississippi-Southern; 
Matters received: 42; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 29; 
Matters declined: 12; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Washington-Eastern; 
Matters received: 38; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 34; 
Matters declined: 29; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Washington-Western; 
Matters received: 35; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 28; 
Matters declined: 13; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Idaho; 
Matters received: 28; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 26; 
Matters declined: 19; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Oregon; 
Matters received: 26; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 24; 
Matters declined: 19; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Colorado; 
Matters received: 26; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 23; 
Matters declined: 10; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Wisconsin-Eastern; 
Matters received: 19; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 18; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Nebraska; 
Matters received: 19; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 16; 
Matters declined: 7; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: North Carolina-Western; 
Matters received: 16; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 11; 
Matters declined: 7; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Minnesota; 
Matters received: 15; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 14; 
Matters declined: 7; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Michigan-Eastern; 
Matters received: 15; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 13; 
Matters declined: 9; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Utah; 
Matters received: 14; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 12; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Iowa-Northern; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 5; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Alabama-Middle; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 5; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Connecticut; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 4; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: New Mexico; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: California-Northern; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: California-Southern; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Texas-Southern; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Florida Southern; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: California-Eastern; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: New York-Western; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Alabama-Southern; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Louisiana-Western; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Wisconsin-Western; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Maine; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Iowa-Southern; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Ohio-Southern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Alabama-Northern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: California-Central; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Maryland; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: New York-Northern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 0; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Pennsylvania-Eastern; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 0; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

USAO district: Overall; 
Matters received: 2,370; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
2,139; 
Matters declined: 854; 
Declination rate[A]: 40%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. 

[End of table] 

Tables 10, 11, and 12, below, show the number of Indian country 
matters received and declination rates by referring agency from fiscal 
years 2005 through 2009. Table 10 includes both violent and nonviolent 
criminal matters, table 11 shows only violent criminal matters, and 
table 12 shows only nonviolent criminal matters. 

Declination rates are calculated based on the number of matters 
actually filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed 
by the USAOs. Declination rates do not include matters that were still 
"pending," that is, that had not yet been filed for prosecution, 
declined or administratively closed. We did not calculate declination 
rates for referring agencies with fewer than 50 matters filed for 
prosecution, declined or administratively closed from fiscal years 
2005 through 2009 because a declination rate would have little meaning 
when based on such a small number of matters. 

Table 10: Indian Country Matters Received and Declination Rates by 
Referring Agency, Violent and Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 
through 2009: 

Referring agency: Federal Bureau of Investigation; 
Matters received: 5,500; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
5,008; 
Matters declined: 2,323; 
Declination rate[A]: 46%. 

Referring agency: Bureau of Indian Affairs; 
Matters received: 2,355; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
2,087; 
Matters declined: 1,305; 
Declination rate[A]: 63%. 

Referring agency: State/County/Municipal Authorities; 
Matters received: 665; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
598; 
Matters declined: 303; 
Declination rate[A]: 51%. 

Referring agency: Other; 
Matters received: 477; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
467; 
Matters declined: 387; 
Declination rate[A]: 83%. 

Referring agency: Drug Enforcement Administration; 
Matters received: 276; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
267; 
Matters declined: 10; 
Declination rate[A]: 4%. 

Referring agency: Joint State/Local Led Task Force; 
Matters received: 119; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
108; 
Matters declined: 26; 
Declination rate[A]: 24%. 

Referring agency: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; 
Matters received: 103; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 89; 
Matters declined: 31; 
Declination rate[A]: 35%. 

Referring agency: Immigration and Customs Enforcement; 
Matters received: 93; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 92; 
Matters declined: 4; 
Declination rate[A]: 4%. 

Referring agency: Joint Federal Bureau of Investigation/State or Local 
Task Force; 
Matters received: 89; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 80; 
Matters declined: 25; 
Declination rate[A]: 31%. 

Referring agency: Customs and Border Protection; 
Matters received: 60; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 59; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: 3%. 

Referring agency: Other Department of the Interior; 
Matters received: 54; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 47; 
Matters declined: 27; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: United States Marshals Service; 
Matters received: 27; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 25; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Justice; 
Matters received: 19; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 17; 
Matters declined: 4; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Postal Service; 
Matters received: 15; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 14; 
Matters declined: 4; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Fish and Wildlife Service; 
Matters received: 15; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 13; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Office of the Inspector General--Health and Human 
Services; 
Matters received: 14; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 12; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and 
Explosives/State or Local Task Force; 
Matters received: 12; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 12; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint United States Marshals Service/State or Local 
Task Force; 
Matters received: 11; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 8; 
Matters declined: 5; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: National Park Service; 
Matters received: 9; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 9; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Citizenship and Immigration Services; 
Matters received: 7; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 7; 
Matters declined: 6; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Transferred from other USAO; 
Matters received: 7; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 7; 
Matters declined: 4; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Indian Health Service/Public Health Service; 
Matters received: 7; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 6; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: United States Secret Service; 
Matters received: 7; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 5; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Forest Service; 
Matters received: 7; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Housing and Urban Development; 
Matters received: 6; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 5; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Office of the Inspector General--Department of 
Justice; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: United States Courts; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 4; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint Drug Enforcement Administration/State or Local 
Task Force; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 4; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Public Health Service; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Bureau of Land Management; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Social Security Administration; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Office of the Inspector General--Department of 
Education; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Air Force; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Agriculture; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Department of State; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Office of the Inspector General--Postal Service; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Health and Human Services; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Department of Education; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Environmental Protection Agency; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Food and Drug Administration; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint Defense/State or Local Task Force; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Metropolitan Police Department--District of Columbia; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Veterans Administration--Utah; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Bureau of Prisons; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Farm Service Agency/Commodity Credit Corp; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Federal Housing Administration; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Internal Revenue Service; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Labor; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Parole Commission; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Tennessee Valley Authority Commission; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Veterans Administration--New Mexico/Albuquerque; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 0; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Overall; 
Matters received: 10,006; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
9,090; 
Matters declined: 4,506; 
Declination rate[A]: 50%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. 

[End of table] 

Table 11: Indian Country Matters Received and Declination Rates by 
Referring Agency, Violent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

Referring agency: Federal Bureau of Investigation; 
Matters received: 4,779; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 
4,377; 
Matters declined: 2,029; 
Declination rate[A]: 46%. 

Referring agency: Bureau of Indian Affairs; 
Matters received: 1,851; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 
1,652; 
Matters declined: 1,053; 
Declination rate[A]: 64%. 

Referring agency: State/County/Municipal Authorities; 
Matters received: 558; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 
506; 
Matters declined: 263; 
Declination rate[A]: 52%. 

Referring agency: Other; 
Matters received: 311; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 
301; 
Matters declined: 260; 
Declination rate[A]: 86%. 

Referring agency: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; 
Matters received: 56; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 
49; 
Matters declined: 21; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint Federal Bureau of Investigation/State or Local 
Task Force; 
Matters received: 34; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 
27; 
Matters declined: 13; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of the Interior; 
Matters received: 17; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 
16; 
Matters declined: 11; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint State/Local Led Task Force; 
Matters received: 16; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 
11; 
Matters declined: 4; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: United States Marshals Service; 
Matters received: 8; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 7; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Justice; 
Matters received: 6; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 6; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and 
Explosives/State or Local Task Force; 
Matters received: 6; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 6; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Transferred from other USAO; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 4; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Immigration and Customs Enforcement; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 4; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Indian Health Service/Public Health Service; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: National Park Service; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint United States Marshals Service/State or Local 
Task Force; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Public Health Service; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Customs and Border Protection; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint Drug Enforcement Administration/State or Local 
Task Force; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: United States Secret Service; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Air Force; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint Defense/State or Local Task Force; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Metropolitan Police Department--District of Columbia; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Postal Service; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Veterans Administration--Utah; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Bureau of Prisons; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Drug Enforcement Administration; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Farm Service Agency/Commodity Credit Corp; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Parole Commission; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: United States Courts; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Veterans Administration--New Mexico/Albuquerque; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Overall; 
Matters received: 7,680; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed: 
6,993; 
Matters declined: 3,671; 
Declination rate[A]: 52%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. 

[End of table] 

Table 12: Indian Country Matters Received and Declination Rates by 
Referring Agency, Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

Referring agency: Federal Bureau of Investigation; 
Matters received: 749; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
657; 
Matters declined: 304; 
Declination rate[A]: 46%. 

Referring agency: Bureau of Indian Affairs; 
Matters received: 516; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
447; 
Matters declined: 261; 
Declination rate[A]: 58%. 

Referring agency: Drug Enforcement Administration; 
Matters received: 275; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
266; 
Matters declined: 10; 
Declination rate[A]: 4%. 

Referring agency: Other; 
Matters received: 167; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
167; 
Matters declined: 127; 
Declination rate[A]: 76%. 

Referring agency: State/County/Municipal Authorities; 
Matters received: 110; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 95; 
Matters declined: 40; 
Declination rate[A]: 42%. 

Referring agency: Joint State/Local Led Task Force; 
Matters received: 103; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 97; 
Matters declined: 22; 
Declination rate[A]: 23%. 

Referring agency: Immigration and Customs Enforcement; 
Matters received: 89; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 88; 
Matters declined: 4; 
Declination rate[A]: 5%. 

Referring agency: Customs and Border Protection; 
Matters received: 58; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 57; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: 4%. 

Referring agency: Joint Federal Bureau of Investigation/State or Local 
Task Force; 
Matters received: 55; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 53; 
Matters declined: 12; 
Declination rate[A]: 23%. 

Referring agency: Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives; 
Matters received: 47; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 40; 
Matters declined: 10; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of the Interior; 
Matters received: 37; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 31; 
Matters declined: 16; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: United States Marshals Service; 
Matters received: 19; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 18; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Fish and Wildlife Service; 
Matters received: 15; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 13; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Postal Service; 
Matters received: 14; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 13; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Office of the Inspector General--Health and Human 
Services; 
Matters received: 14; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 12; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Justice; 
Matters received: 13; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 11; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint United States Marshals Service/State or Local 
Task Force; 
Matters received: 8; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 6; 
Matters declined: 4; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Citizenship and Immigration Services; 
Matters received: 7; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 7; 
Matters declined: 6; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Forest Service; 
Matters received: 7; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: National Park Service; 
Matters received: 6; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 6; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and 
Explosives/State or Local Task Force; 
Matters received: 6; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 6; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Housing and Urban Development; 
Matters received: 6; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 5; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: United States Secret Service; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 4; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Office of the Inspector General--Department of 
Justice; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Bureau of Land Management; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Indian Health Service/Public Health Service; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Transferred from other USAO; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: United States Courts; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Social Security Administration; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 3; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Office of the Inspector General--Department of 
Education; 
Matters received: 3; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Agriculture; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Department of State; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Joint Drug Enforcement Administration/State or Local 
Task Force; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Office of the Inspector General--Postal Service; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Health and Human Services; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Air Force; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Department of Education; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Environmental Protection Agency; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Food and Drug Administration; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Navajo and Hopi Indian Relocation; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Public Health Service; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Federal Housing Administration; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Internal Revenue Service; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Other Department of Labor; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Tennessee Valley Authority Commission; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 0; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Referring agency: Overall; 
Matters received: 2,370; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
2,139; 
Matters declined: 854; 
Declination rate[A]: 40%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. 

[End of table] 

Tables 13, 14, and 15, below, show the number of Indian country 
matters received and declination rates by charge category from fiscal 
years 2005 through 2009. Table 13 includes both violent and nonviolent 
criminal matters, table 14 shows only violent criminal matters, and 
table 15 shows only nonviolent criminal matters. 

Declination rates are calculated based on the number of matters 
actually filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed 
by the USAOs. Declination rates do not include matters that were still 
"pending," that is, that had not yet been filed for prosecution, 
declined or administratively closed. We did not calculate declination 
rates for charge categories with fewer than 50 matters filed for 
prosecution, declined or administratively closed from fiscal years 
2005 through 2009 because a declination rate would have little meaning 
when based on such a small number of matters. For a detailed 
explanation of the specific charges included in each charge category 
see table 6 in enclosure I. 

Table 13: Indian Country Matters Received and Declination Rates by 
Charge Category, Violent and Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 
through 2009: 

Charge category: Assault; 
Matters received: 2,922; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
2,922; 
Matters declined: 1,341; 
Declination rate[A]: 46%. 

Charge category: Sexual abuse and related offenses; 
Matters received: 2,594; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
2,594; 
Matters declined: 1,745; 
Declination rate[A]: 67%. 

Charge category: Pending matters[B]; 
Matters received: 990; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 75; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: 0%. 

Charge category: Drug offenses; 
Matters received: 739; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
739; 
Matters declined: 136; 
Declination rate[A]: 18%. 

Charge category: Offenses involving theft or deceit; 
Matters received: 739; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
738; 
Matters declined: 359; 
Declination rate[A]: 49%. 

Charge category: Homicide, including attempts; 
Matters received: 626; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
626; 
Matters declined: 292; 
Declination rate[A]: 47%. 

Charge category: Unspecified Indian country offenses; 
Matters received: 445; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
445; 
Matters declined: 297; 
Declination rate[A]: 67%. 

Charge category: Firearms, explosives and related offenses; 
Matters received: 355; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
355; 
Matters declined: 120; 
Declination rate[A]: 34%. 

Charge category: Unknown; 
Matters received: 200; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
200; 
Matters declined: 71; 
Declination rate[A]: 36%. 

Charge category: Obstruction of justice offenses; 
Matters received: 115; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
115; 
Matters declined: 29; 
Declination rate[A]: 25%. 

Charge category: Other offenses involving threats, force or violence; 
Matters received: 78; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 78; 
Matters declined: 43; 
Declination rate[A]: 55%. 

Charge category: Immigration offenses; 
Matters received: 67; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 67; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: 4%. 

Charge category: Juvenile delinquency matters; 
Matters received: 37; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 37; 
Matters declined: 15; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Conservation and environmental offenses; 
Matters received: 30; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 30; 
Matters declined: 10; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Civil rights offenses; 
Matters received: 25; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 25; 
Matters declined: 22; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Property damage or trespass offenses; 
Matters received: 21; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 21; 
Matters declined: 12; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Racketeering offenses; 
Matters received: 12; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 12; 
Matters declined: 8; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Postal Service offenses; 
Matters received: 9; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 9; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Gambling offenses; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Overall; 
Matters received: 10,006; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
9,090; 
Matters declined: 4,506; 
Declination rate[A]: 50%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. 

[B] "Pending matters" includes matters where DOJ had not yet decided 
whether to charge or decline to prosecute, and 75 matters (reflected 
in the second data column) that were subsequently filed for 
prosecution or administratively closed but for which charge 
information was not available in the data provided by DOJ. 

[End of table] 

Table 14: Indian Country Matters Received and Declination Rates by 
Charge Category, Violent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

Charge category: Assault; 
Matters received: 2,869; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
2,869; 
Matters declined: 1,316; 
Declination rate[A]: 46%. 

Charge category: Sexual abuse and related offenses; 
Matters received: 2,450; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
2,450; 
Matters declined: 1,655; 
Declination rate[A]: 68%. 

Charge category: Pending matters[B]; 
Matters received: 752; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 66; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: 0%. 

Charge category: Homicide, including attempts; 
Matters received: 606; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
606; 
Matters declined: 280; 
Declination rate[A]: 46%. 

Charge category: Firearms, explosives and related offenses; 
Matters received: 266; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
266; 
Matters declined: 90; 
Declination rate[A]: 34%. 

Charge category: Unspecified Indian country offenses; 
Matters received: 253; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
253; 
Matters declined: 130; 
Declination rate[A]: 51%. 

Charge category: Unknown; 
Matters received: 131; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
131; 
Matters declined: 42; 
Declination rate[A]: 32%. 

Charge category: Offenses involving theft or deceit; 
Matters received: 128; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
127; 
Matters declined: 51; 
Declination rate[A]: 40%. 

Charge category: Other offenses involving threats, force or violence; 
Matters received: 71; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 71; 
Matters declined: 38; 
Declination rate[A]: 54%. 

Charge category: Obstruction of justice offenses; 
Matters received: 51; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 51; 
Matters declined: 15; 
Declination rate[A]: 29%. 

Charge category: Drug offenses; 
Matters received: 39; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 39; 
Matters declined: 17; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Juvenile delinquency matters; 
Matters received: 28; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 28; 
Matters declined: 9; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Civil rights offenses; 
Matters received: 21; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 21; 
Matters declined: 19; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Property damage or trespass offenses; 
Matters received: 8; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 8; 
Matters declined: 5; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Racketeering offenses; 
Matters received: 5; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 5; 
Matters declined: 4; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Immigration offenses; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Postal Service offenses; 
Matters received: 1; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 1; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Overall; 
Matters received: 7,680; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
6,993; 
Matters declined: 3,671; 
Declination rate[A]: 52%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. 

[B] "Pending matters" includes matters where DOJ had not yet decided 
whether to charge or decline to prosecute, and 66 matters (reflected 
in the second data column) that were subsequently filed for 
prosecution or administratively closed but for which charge 
information was not available in the data provided by DOJ. 

[End of table] 

Table 15: Indian Country Matters Received and Declination Rates by 
Charge Category, Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

Charge category: Drug offenses; 
Matters received: 700; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
700; 
Matters declined: 119; 
Declination rate[A]: 17%. 

Charge category: Offenses involving theft or deceit; 
Matters received: 612; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
612; 
Matters declined: 309; 
Declination rate[A]: 50%. 

Charge category: Pending matters[B]; 
Matters received: 240; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 9; 
Matters declined: 0; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Unspecified Indian country offenses; 
Matters received: 193; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
193; 
Matters declined: 167; 
Declination rate[A]: 87%. 

Charge category: Sexual abuse and related offenses; 
Matters received: 157; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
157; 
Matters declined: 96; 
Declination rate[A]: 61%. 

Charge category: Firearms, explosives and related offenses; 
Matters received: 90; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 90; 
Matters declined: 30; 
Declination rate[A]: 33%. 

Charge category: Assault; 
Matters received: 75; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 75; 
Matters declined: 35; 
Declination rate[A]: 47%. 

Charge category: Unknown; 
Matters received: 71; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 71; 
Matters declined: 29; 
Declination rate[A]: 41%. 

Charge category: Immigration offenses; 
Matters received: 66; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 66; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: 5%. 

Charge category: Obstruction of justice offenses; 
Matters received: 64; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 64; 
Matters declined: 14; 
Declination rate[A]: 22%. 

Charge category: Conservation and environmental offenses; 
Matters received: 30; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 30; 
Matters declined: 10; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Homicide, including attempts; 
Matters received: 22; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 22; 
Matters declined: 14; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Property damage or trespass offenses; 
Matters received: 13; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 13; 
Matters declined: 7; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Juvenile delinquency matters; 
Matters received: 9; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 9; 
Matters declined: 6; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Postal Service offenses; 
Matters received: 8; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 8; 
Matters declined: 2; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Other offenses involving threats, force or violence; 
Matters received: 7; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 7; 
Matters declined: 5; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Racketeering offenses; 
Matters received: 7; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 7; 
Matters declined: 4; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Civil rights offenses; 
Matters received: 4; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 4; 
Matters declined: 3; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Gambling offenses; 
Matters received: 2; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 2; 
Matters declined: 1; 
Declination rate[A]: [Empty]. 

Charge category: Overall; 
Matters received: 2,370; 
Matters filed for prosecution, declined or administratively closed: 
2,139; 
Matters declined: 854; 
Declination rate[A]: 40%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Matters received that have not been filed for prosecution, 
declined, or administratively closed are not included in the 
declination rate. 

[B] "Pending matters" includes matters where DOJ had not yet decided 
whether to charge or decline to prosecute, and 9 matters (reflected in 
the second data column) that were subsequently filed for prosecution 
or administratively closed but for which charge information was not 
available in the data provided by DOJ. 

[End of table] 

Tables 16, 17, and 18, below show the reasons provided in LIONS for 
declinations of Indian country matters. Immediate and later 
declinations both require one reason to be provided. However, later 
declinations my also include up to two additional reasons. Therefore, 
the total number of reasons exceeds the total number of declinations. 
Table 16 includes reasons provided for both violent and nonviolent 
criminal matters, table 17 shows only reasons associated with violent 
criminal matters, and table 18 shows only reasons associated with 
nonviolent criminal matters. 

Table 16: Frequency of Declination Reasons, Violent and Nonviolent 
Crimes, Fiscal Years 2005 through 2009: 

Declination reason: Weak or insufficient admissible evidence; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1,878; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 42%. 

Declination reason: No federal offense evident; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 797; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 18%. 

Declination reason: Witness problems; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 537; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 12%. 

Declination reason: Lack of evidence of criminal intent; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 467; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 10%. 

Declination reason: Suspect to be prosecuted by other authorities; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 457; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 10%. 

Declination reason: Agency request; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 161; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 4%. 

Declination reason: Minimal federal interest or no deterrent value; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 150; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 3%. 

Declination reason: No known suspect; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 117; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 3%. 

Declination reason: Office policy (fails to meet prosecutive 
guidelines); 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 109; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Offender's age, health, prior record, or personal 
matter; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 94; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Jurisdiction or venue problems; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 91; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Staleness; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 84; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Civil, administrative, or other disciplinary 
alternative; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 80; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Lack of investigative resources; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 70; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Juvenile suspect; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 65; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 1%. 

Declination reason: Lack of prosecutive resources; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 58; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect being prosecuted on other charges; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 55; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect deceased; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 37; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect serving sentence; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 25; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Statute of limitations; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 16; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Opened in error/office error; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 12; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Pretrial diversion completed; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 12; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Petite policy; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 8; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect cooperation; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 8; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect a fugitive; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 6; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Declined per instructions from DOJ; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 5; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Local agency referral presented by federal agency; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 5; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Restitution/arrearage payments made or being made; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 4; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Department policy; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 3; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: By action of the grand jury (no true bill); 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: All work completed--to be used for miscellaneous 
matters; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect deported; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Up to three reasons may be associated with a declination. 
Therefore, the number of reasons cited exceeds the number of 
declinations for violent and nonviolent crimes of 4,506 and the sum of 
percentages exceeds 100. 

[End of table] 

Table 17: Frequency of Declination Reasons, Violent Crimes, Fiscal 
Years 2005 through 2009: 

Declination reason: Weak or insufficient admissible evidence; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1,619; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 44%. 

Declination reason: No federal offense evident; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 609; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 17%. 

Declination reason: Witness problems; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 505; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 14%. 

Declination reason: Lack of evidence of criminal intent; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 374; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 10%. 

Declination reason: Suspect to be prosecuted by other authorities; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 354; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 10%. 

Declination reason: Agency request; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 121; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 3%. 

Declination reason: No known suspect; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 94; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 3%. 

Declination reason: Minimal federal interest or no deterrent value; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 91; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Offender's age, health, prior record, or personal 
matter; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 87; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Office policy (fails to meet prosecutive 
guidelines); 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 74; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Jurisdiction or venue problems; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 71; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Lack of investigative resources; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 62; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Staleness; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 58; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Civil, administrative, or other disciplinary 
alternative; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 52; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 1%. 

Declination reason: Juvenile suspect; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 52; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 1%. 

Declination reason: Lack of prosecutive resources; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 48; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect being prosecuted on other charges; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 46; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect deceased; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 31; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect serving sentence; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 21; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Statute of limitations; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 10; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Opened in error/office error; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 7; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Petite policy; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 7; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect a fugitive; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 6; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Declined per instructions from DOJ; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 5; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect cooperation; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 5; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Pretrial diversion completed; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 4; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Local agency referral presented by federal agency; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 3; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: All work completed--to be used for miscellaneous 
matters; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Department policy; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Restitution/arrearage payments made or being made; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Up to three reasons may be associated with a declination. 
Therefore, the number of reasons cited exceeds the number of 
declinations for violent crimes of 3,671 and the sum of percentages 
exceeds 100. 

[End of table] 

Table 18: Frequency of Declination Reasons, Nonviolent Crimes, Fiscal 
Years 2005 through 2009: 

Declination reason: Weak or insufficient admissible evidence; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 266; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 31%. 

Declination reason: No federal offense evident; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 190; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 22%. 

Declination reason: Suspect to be prosecuted by other authorities; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 104; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 12%. 

Declination reason: Lack of evidence of criminal intent; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 94; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 11%. 

Declination reason: Minimal federal interest or no deterrent value; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 59; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 7%. 

Declination reason: Agency request; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 43; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 5%. 

Declination reason: Office policy (fails to meet prosecutive 
guidelines); 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 35; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 4%. 

Declination reason: Witness problems; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 35; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 4%. 

Declination reason: Civil, administrative, or other disciplinary 
alternative; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 28; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 3%. 

Declination reason: Staleness; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 27; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 3%. 

Declination reason: No known suspect; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 23; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 3%. 

Declination reason: Jurisdiction or venue problems; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 20; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Juvenile suspect; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 13; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 2%. 

Declination reason: Lack of prosecutive resources; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 10; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect being prosecuted on other charges; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 9; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: 1%. 

Declination reason: Lack of investigative resources; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 8; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Pretrial diversion completed; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 8; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Offender's age, health, prior record, or personal 
matter; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 7; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect deceased; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 7; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Statute of limitations; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 6; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Opened in error/office error; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 5; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect serving sentence; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 4; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Restitution/arrearage payments made or being made; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 3; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect cooperation; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 3; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Department policy; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 2; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Local agency referral presented by federal agency; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 2; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: By action of the grand jury (no true bill); 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Petite policy; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Declination reason: Suspect deported; 
Number of declinations citing reason[A]: 1; 
Percentage of declinations citing reason[A]: less than 1%. 

Source: GAO analysis of DOJ data. 

[A] Up to three reasons may be associated with a declination. 
Therefore, the number of reasons cited exceeds the number of 
declinations for nonviolent crimes of 854 and the sum of percentages 
exceeds 100. 

[End of table] 

[End of Enclosure II] 

Enclosure III: Comments from the Department of Justice: 

U.S. Department of Justice: 
Executive Office for United States Attorneys: 
Office of the Director: 
Main Justice Building, Room 2260: 
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20530:	
(202) 252-1000: 

December 3, 2010: 

Mr. Glenn Davis: 
Assistant Director: 		
Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street, N.W. 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Re: U.S. Department of Justice Declinations of Indian Country Criminal 
Matters; GAO Engagement Code 440923: 

Dear Mr. Davis: 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the report titled "U.S. 
Department of Justice Declinations of Indian Country Criminal 
Matters." The Executive Office for United States Attorneys (EOUSA) 
appreciates GAO's cooperation and efforts on this project. We hope 
this presentation of declination data will be used constructively to 
work toward solutions to reducing crime in Indian Country. 

We particularly appreciate your team's efforts to present this data in 
appropriate context. For many of the reasons you have included in your 
report, the declination data generated by our current Legal 
Information Office Network System (LIONS) is not an appropriate 
measure of the dedication and commitment of the United States 
Attorneys' Offices (USAOs) in Indian Country. As the report 
recognizes, the receipt of a referral from a law enforcement agency 
does not mean that a prosecutable case exists. In fact the second most 
frequent reason given for declinations by the USAOs is "No Federal 
Offense Evident," i.e., the conduct alleged is not a violation of the 
Federal statutes setting forth the crimes which can be prosecuted by 
the United States in Indian Country. Yet another reason cited for 
declinations is that there is no legal jurisdiction over certain 
individuals or no legal venue to prosecute the crime in Federal court. 
In addition, as the report points out, the determination to decline to 
bring a Federal criminal prosecution does not mean that a crime is 
left unaddressed. Many cases are declined by the USAOs when the 
defendant is being prosecuted by other authorities, on other charges, 
or has been subject to other civil or administrative proceedings or a 
pretrial diversion program (similar to a period of probation). 

The public safety challenges in Indian Country are not uniform. They 
vary widely from district to district - and from tribe to tribe - 
based upon unique conditions, a complex set of legal jurisdictional 
issues, geographic challenges, differences in tribal cultures, and the 
number of tribes and reservations within a particular district. The 
officer-to-population ratio still remains lower on Indian reservations 
than in other jurisdictions across the country, and law enforcement 
agencies in Indian Country have the unique challenge of patrolling 
large areas of sparsely populated land. The uniformity of LIONS data 
and its suitability for statistical analysis are affected by the 
variances among districts and by the discretion afforded the 93 
individual United States Attorneys to use the system to manage their 
offices to meet local priorities and needs. For example, individual 
offices may have different criteria for entering matters in LIONS. A 
change in a LIONS-generated declination rate may be entirely 
attributable to a change in the office's LIONS policy rather than as a 
result of any changes in the crime rate or prosecution practices or 
capabilities in that district. In addition, as the report 
acknowledges, variations in the practice of law enforcement agencies 
in referring cases to USAOs can also affect the declination rates of 
USAOs. As noted, some agencies may refer every allegation, even if 
unsupported, to a USA() (resulting in a declination), while other 
agencies may refer only those cases which they believe are fully 
investigated and ready for prosecution. 

More importantly, the data contained in the report must be considered 
in the context of appropriate prosecutorial decision-making. The 
decision to charge someone with a crime and to seek to deprive the 
defendant of his or her liberty represents the exercise of power which 
must be used judiciously. With respect to all crimes, the United 
States Attorney's Manual and the Principles of Federal Prosecution 
provide that Department of Justice attorneys "should initiate or 
recommend Federal prosecution if he/she believes that the person's 
conduct constitutes a Federal offense and that the admissible evidence 
probably will be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction. 
Evidence sufficient to sustain a conviction is required under Rule 
29(a), Fed. R. Crim. P., to avoid a judgment of acquittal. Moreover, 
both as a matter of fundamental fairness and in the interest of the 
efficient administration of justice, no prosecution should be 
initiated against any person unless the government believes that the 
person probably will be found guilty by an unbiased trier of fact." 
United States Attorneys' Manual Section 9-27.220 (Comment). Each case 
must be evaluated on the evidence available to the prosecutor. 
Accordingly, it would not be appropriate to use the data contained in 
this report to promote any type of prosecutorial quota system or 
incentives to prosecute a higher number of individuals. 

Similarly, the declination rates generated by LIONS data are not an 
appropriate measure of all the ongoing efforts by United States 
Attorneys to be actively engaged with their partners in tribal law 
enforcement. Last year, the Attorney General launched a Department-
wide initiative on public safety in tribal communities. A component of 
that initiative is that every USA() with Indian Country in its 
district will engage annually in consultation with the tribes in that 
district, in coordination with the FBI, the Bureau of Indian Affairs, 
the U.S. Marshals Service, the Drug Enforcement Agency, and the Bureau 
of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, and, where appropriate, 
state and local law enforcement. In addition USAOs are currently 
implementing operational plans designed to foster ongoing government-
to-government relationships with the tribes; to improve communications 
with tribal law enforcement regarding charging decisions; to initiate 
cross-deputization and Special Assistant United States Attorney 
agreements where appropriate; and to establish training for all 
relevant criminal justice personnel on issues related to Indian 
Country criminal jurisdiction and legal issues. 

The public safety challenges confronting Indian Country are great, and 
the Department's enhanced efforts in Indian Country can be resource 
intensive. We are pleased that the FY 2011 President's Budget requests 
$448.8 million in total resources for initiatives in Indian Country. 
New investments include significant grant resources for addressing a 
broad range of criminal justice issues and additional FBI agents to 
help tribal communities combat illegal drug use, trafficking, and 
violent crime. 

The Department has a responsibility to build a successful and 
sustainable response to the scourge of violent crime on reservations. 
In partnership with tribes, our goal is to find and implement 
solutions to immediate and long-term public safety challenges 
confronting Indian Country. Thank you for your time and attention to 
this important matter. 

Sincerely, 

Signed by: 

H. Marshall Jarrett: 
Director: 

[End of Enclosure III] 

Enclosure IV: 

GAO Contact: 

If you or your staff have questions concerning this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-9627 or maurerd@gao.gov. 

Staff Acknowledgments: 

In addition to the contact named above, William Crocker III and Glenn 
Davis, Assistant Directors, and Christoph Hoashi-Erhardt, Senior 
Analyst, managed this review. Ami Ballenger, Rebecca Rygg, and Candice 
Wright made significant contributions to the work. Christine Davis 
provided legal support. David Alexander and Minette Richardson 
assisted with the design, methodology, and data analysis. Katherine 
Davis provided assistance in report preparation. 

[End of Enclosure IV] 

Footnotes: 

[1] The Tribal Law and Order Act of 2010 (Pub. L. No. 111-211, tit. 
II, 124 Stat. 2258, 2261 (2010)) provides tribes with authority to 
sentence certain convicted Indian offenders for up to 3 years of 
imprisonment, provided that they afford additional pretrial and trial 
protections to safeguard the rights of the accused. See 25 U.S.C. § 
1302. Before the passage of the act on July 29, 2010 the sentencing 
authority of tribes was limited to one year. 

[2] For example, states have jurisdiction over crimes occurring in 
Indian country where both parties are non-Indians. In addition, the 
federal government has enacted statutes giving certain states 
authority to prosecute crimes committed by or against Indians in 
Indian country. See, e.g., 18 U.S.C. § 1162, which confers such 
jurisdiction for all, or parts, of Indian country in Alaska, 
California, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, and Wisconsin. 

[3] Results from nonprobability samples cannot be used to make 
inferences about a population, because in a nonprobability sample some 
elements of the population being studied have no chance or an unknown 
chance of being selected as part of the sample. 

[4] This is the first of two efforts related to tribal justice issues 
that we reviewed in response to your request during this time. The 
second effort is focused on the challenges that select tribes face in 
adjudicating Indian country crimes, and collaboration between the 
Department of the Interior and DOJ to support tribal justice systems. 
We expect to issue the final results from that effort in 2011. 

[5] As of September 30, 2009, about 1,000 of the 10,000 matters were 
pending action by the USAOs. 

[6] Administratively closed matters were not declined, but were closed 
in LIONS for administrative reasons. These include, for instance, 
matters that were combined with another matter for prosecution and 
were, therefore, not declined. 

[7] Up to three reasons may be associated with a declination; 
therefore, the sum of the individual percentages for the three reasons 
presented here exceeds 65. 

[8] The term "Indian country" refers to all land within the limits of 
any Indian reservation under the jurisdiction of the U.S. government, 
all dependent Indian communities within U.S. borders, and all existing 
Indian allotments, including any rights-of-way running through an 
allotment. See 18 U.S.C. § 1151. 

[9] The tribal government also has jurisdiction to prosecute Indian 
offenders who commit crimes in Indian country, even in circumstances 
where federal jurisdiction exists. 

[10] There are no fixed criteria for USAOs in categorizing violent 
versus nonviolent matters. DOJ officials told us that the 
categorization is made at the discretion of the prosecutor depending 
on the nature of the alleged crime and that categorization practices 
may differ among districts. 

[11] In the event USAO declines to prosecute a matter, it must 
coordinate with appropriate tribal justice officials regarding the use 
of evidence relevant to the prosecution of the case in a tribal court 
with concurrent jurisdiction, that is, declined cases involving Indian 
offenders. See 25 U.S.C. § 2809(a)(3). 

[12] We calculated the declination rate as the number of matters 
declined divided by the number of matters that were resolved--that is, 
filed for prosecution, declined, or administratively closed. We did 
not include pending matters given that action had not yet been taken 
on them. See enclosure I for a more detailed discussion of our 
methodology. 

[13] LIONS tracks only the declination reasons chosen by the USAOs and 
not case-specific facts behind individual declinations. 

[14] Up to three reasons may be associated with a declination; 
therefore, the sum of percentages for the top five reasons exceeds 83. 

[15] Results from nonprobability samples cannot be used to make 
inferences about a population, because in a nonprobability sample some 
elements of the population being studied have no chance or an unknown 
chance of being selected as part of the sample. 

[16] This is the first of two efforts related to tribal justice issues 
that we reviewed in response to your request during this time. The 
second effort is focused on the challenges that select tribes face in 
adjudicating Indian country crimes, and collaboration between the 
Department of the Interior and DOJ to support tribal justice systems. 
We expect to issue the final results from that effort in 2011. 

[End of section] 

GAO's Mission: 

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability. 

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony: 

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. Each 
weekday, GAO posts newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence on its Web site. To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly 
posted products every afternoon, go to [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] 
and select "E-mail Updates." 

Order by Phone: 

The price of each GAO publication reflects GAO’s actual cost of
production and distribution and depends on the number of pages in the
publication and whether the publication is printed in color or black and
white. Pricing and ordering information is posted on GAO’s Web site, 
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/ordering.htm]. 

Place orders by calling (202) 512-6000, toll free (866) 801-7077, or
TDD (202) 512-2537. 

Orders may be paid for using American Express, Discover Card,
MasterCard, Visa, check, or money order. Call for additional 
information. 

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs: 

Contact: 

Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]: 
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov: 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470: 

Congressional Relations: 

Ralph Dawn, Managing Director, dawnr@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4400: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7125: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: 

Public Affairs: 

Chuck Young, Managing Director, youngc1@gao.gov: 
(202) 512-4800: 
U.S. Government Accountability Office: 
441 G Street NW, Room 7149: 
Washington, D.C. 20548: