Loading
Donate

Alabama Arrests

State Arrest Report PDF Marijuana Arrests By County 1995 - 1997

1995

1996

1997

1995 to 1997

NAME

TL

AQ



RATE


TL


AQ


RATE


TL


AQ


RATE


RANK


CHANGE


RANK
Alabama 7,342 0.87 172.63 8,982 0.92 210.20 9,928 0.91 229.87 - 33.16% -
Autauga 106 1.16 274.43 111 0.94 286.04 82 0.63 209.06 21 -23.82% 55
Baldwin 372 1.48 319.01 368 1.39 314.11 321 1.14 271.09 10 -15.02% 51
Barbour 24 0.75 93.22 26 0.65 100.52 38 0.81 145.37 42 55.94% 29
Bibb 23 0.85 129.63 24 0.83 134.64 27 0.84 149.88 41 15.63% 41
Blount 35 0.69 83.79 17 0.46 40.51 35 0.57 82.52 59 -1.52% 47
Bullock 9 0.47 79.58 8 0.42 70.41 NR - - - - -
Butler 8 0.30 36.19 23 0.49 103.57 25 0.79 111.38 50 207.78% 7
Calhoun 311 0.91 263.98 280 0.82 236.56 371 0.98 310.12 4 17.48% 39
Chambers 80 0.90 213.13 97 0.99 257.23 112 1.00 293.86 6 37.87% 36
Cherokee 69 1.74 334.32 30 1.05 144.68 35 1.04 167.01 38 -50.05% 61
Chilton 25 0.66 72.53 38 1.02 109.73 59 1.14 168.57 37 132.43% 10
Choctaw 3 3.67 18.51 20 0.85 122.82 12 2.63 72.91 61 293.97% 3
Clarke 34 0.77 119.91 31 0.63 108.83 27 0.83 93.78 55 -21.79% 53
Clay 7 0.67 51.46 2 0.20 14.63 11 0.57 79.65 60 54.79% 31
Cleburne 33 2.05 247.32 9 1.04 67.14 15 1.19 110.73 51 -55.23% 64
Coffee 31 0.34 73.21 36 0.35 84.63 81 0.70 188.40 30 157.33% 9
Colbert 77 0.64 145.41 96 0.82 180.45 134 0.98 249.21 15 71.39% 22
Conecuh 13 0.59 91.46 20 0.71 140.06 20 0.68 138.57 44 51.51% 32
Coosa 6 0.31 51.72 23 1.10 197.34 25 0.97 212.22 20 310.37% 2
Covington 39 0.48 104.58 75 0.84 200.18 41 0.58 108.27 52 3.53% 46
Crenshaw 8 0.39 58.58 3 0.13 21.87 3 0.12 21.64 66 -63.07% 66
Cullman 91 0.48 126.12 108 0.57 148.98 140 0.67 191.07 26 51.50% 33
Dale 244 1.52 478.11 204 1.34 397.91 99 0.68 191.06 28 -60.04% 65
Dallas 128 0.75 264.20 119 0.67 244.48 94 0.56 191.06 27 -27.68% 57
De Kalb 46 1.27 79.38 61 1.70 104.77 102 1.07 173.33 35 118.36% 12
Elmore 101 0.97 170.26 120 0.90 201.36 120 0.72 199.22 24 17.01% 40
Escambia 38 0.66 103.53 28 0.43 75.93 32 0.47 85.86 58 -17.07% 52
Etowah 196 0.79 194.60 248 0.85 245.09 309 0.89 302.13 5 55.26% 30
Fayette 17 0.74 103.90 19 0.60 115.59 27 1.00 162.51 40 56.41% 28
Franklin 58 0.80 198.24 54 0.70 183.72 56 0.59 188.50 29 -4.91% 48
Geneva 46 1.04 185.75 57 1.18 229.12 50 1.02 198.86 25 7.06% 44
Greene 5 0.59 49.01 5 0.48 48.79 9 0.84 86.88 57 77.27% 21
Hale 1 0.28 6.11 11 0.74 66.93 16 1.00 96.32 54 1475.92% 1
Henry 73 2.62 460.57 55 2.02 345.43 36 1.21 223.73 16 -51.42% 62
Houston 182 0.83 215.29 211 0.92 248.43 346 0.97 403.04 1 87.21% 18
Jackson 104 0.92 208.22 110 1.02 219.21 138 1.16 272.10 9 30.68% 37
Jefferson 1,333 1.02 200.98 2,080 1.32 312.06 2,283 1.36 338.81 3 68.58% 24
Lamar 9 0.77 56.74 24 0.88 150.63 7 0.83 43.47 65 -23.39% 54
Lauderdale 58 0.45 69.19 69 0.74 81.93 121 0.74 142.15 43 105.44% 13
Lawrence 32 0.52 97.87 28 0.47 85.24 20 0.34 60.24 63 -38.45% 60
Lee 207 1.12 223.36 225 1.10 241.66 190 0.80 201.90 23 -9.61% 49
Limestone 170 1.34 290.27 131 0.99 222.64 107 0.70 179.91 34 -38.02% 59
Lowndes 20 0.81 154.49 36 1.46 276.80 29 1.03 220.60 17 42.79% 35
Macon 26 1.04 106.77 44 1.14 179.86 28 0.55 113.25 49 6.06% 45
Madison 461 0.91 177.23 569 0.98 217.73 683 1.06 258.57 13 45.90% 34
Marengo 26 0.76 109.65 63 1.00 264.48 45 0.73 186.92 32 70.46% 23
Marion 53 0.78 163.75 34 0.54 104.57 35 0.66 106.51 53 -34.96% 58
Marshall 83 0.38 108.02 76 0.41 98.45 160 0.52 205.06 22 89.84% 17
Mobile 831 0.81 207.93 989 0.76 246.31 758 0.51 186.77 33 -10.18% 50
Monroe 9 0.28 36.54 10 0.29 40.42 32 0.72 127.96 45 250.15% 5
Montgomery 280 0.62 127.27 263 0.56 118.99 567 1.59 253.79 14 99.41% 16
Morgan 191 0.72 178.45 287 0.89 266.90 316 0.91 290.75 8 62.93% 25
Perry 6 0.31 47.25 20 0.81 156.76 22 0.79 170.62 36 261.12% 4
Pickens 76 1.80 360.10 49 1.28 231.11 56 1.42 261.35 12 -27.42% 56
Pike 8 0.21 27.68 18 0.49 61.98 27 0.53 91.98 56 232.36% 6
Randolph 16 1.05 78.14 14 0.44 68.06 26 0.70 125.07 47 60.05% 26
Russell 102 0.82 196.11 107 0.77 204.77 114 0.74 215.85 18 10.06% 43
Shelby 172 1.31 144.30 210 1.46 175.36 197 1.32 162.76 39 12.79% 42
St. Clair 35 0.46 62.08 43 0.46 75.92 73 0.65 127.52 46 105.41% 14
Sumter 23 0.81 139.28 17 0.58 102.48 11 0.68 65.61 62 -52.90% 63
Talladega 77 0.47 100.56 103 0.53 133.89 146 0.72 187.77 31 86.73% 19
Tallapoosa 39 0.35 106.83 51 0.38 139.05 80 0.66 215.81 19 102.01% 15
Tuscaloosa 155 1.20 97.91 460 1.22 289.21 422 1.01 262.50 11 168.10% 8
Walker 112 0.76 160.61 162 0.99 231.25 206 0.95 290.94 7 81.14% 20
Washington 9 0.71 51.97 5 0.68 28.74 21 0.79 119.43 48 129.80% 11
Wilcox 5 0.20 35.99 5 0.26 35.83 8 0.34 56.72 64 57.58% 27
Winston 75 1.68 321.71 43 0.96 183.60 90 1.77 380.21 2 18.19% 38

Notes:

NR:None Reported.

TL: Total Marijuana Arrests Reported.

AQ: Arrest Quotient. This indicator compares local marijuana arrests to national marijuana arrests in proportion to all arrests. The AQ is produced through dividing the local percentage of marijuana arrests by the national percentage. A value of 1.0 indicates that local marijuana arrests are the same percentage of all arrests as the are nationally. A value of 2.0 indicates that local marijuana arrests are twice the percentage of local arrests as they are nationally. AQ values less than 1.0 indicate that local marijuana arrests are less of a percentage of all local arrests than the national standard. A value of .5 indicates that local marijuana arrests are one half the percentage they represent of all national arrests.

RATE: Marijuana arrest rate per 100,000 population.

CHANGE: Percent change in arrest rate from 1995 to 1997.

Citation: Gettman, Jon B. (2000) "US Marijuana Arrests. Part One – County Level Data" Washington, D.C.: National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

Original Data Source: Uniform Crime Reporting Program Data [United States]: County-Level Detailed Arrest And Offense Data, [Computer files]. ICPSR ed. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [producer and distributor], 1999.





Shop at AmazonSmile