Arizona Arrestee Reporting
Information Network
Preliminary Report on Veterans
among Maricopa County Arrestees
April 2009

A Preliminary Report on Veterans in the Maricopa
County Arrestee Population

By
Michael D. White, Ph.D.
David E. Choate, M.A.
Charles M. Katz, Ph.D.

April 2009

Suggested citation:
White, M.D., Choate, D.E., & Katz, C.M. (2009). Military Veterans in the Maricopa County
Arrestee Population: Prevalence, Problems and Implications. Phoenix, AZ: Center for Violence
Prevention & Community Safety, Arizona State University.

Acknowledgements
The author thanks Peter Ozanne and Amy Rex for their establishment of the AARIN project and for all of their hard
work and assistance on the project. We also thank Sheriff Arpaio of the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office, Chief
Conrad of the Glendale Police Department, Chief Gascón of the Mesa Police Department, Chief Carol Boone of the
Maricopa County Juvenile Probation, and all of the officers who helped conduct the study.
This project was funded by Maricopa County. Opinions contained herein are those of the author and do not represent
the position of either Maricopa County or Arizona State University.
Project Staff
Charles M. Katz, Principal Investigator
Watts Family Director
Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety
Arizona State University
Marie Griffin, Co-Principal Investigator
Associate Professor
School of Criminology and Criminal Justice
Arizona State University
Michael D. White, Co-Principal Investigator
Associate Professor
School of Criminology and Criminal Justice
Arizona State University
Casey Klaus, Data Collection Supervisor
AARIN Project Manager
Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety
Arizona State University
David Choate, Data Analyst
Program Operations Manager
Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety
Arizona State University
Jody Arganbright
Business Operations Manager
Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety
Arizona State University
Matthew Roy, Editor
Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety
Arizona State University
© 2008 by the Arizona Board of Regents for and on behalf of Arizona State University
and its Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety.
Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety
P.O. Box 37100, Mail Code 3253 Phoenix, AZ 85069-7100
(602) 543-5959
E-mail: ckatz@asu.edu
Web site: www.cvpcs.asu.edu
This document may be copied and transmitted freely. No deletions, additions, or alterations of contents
are permitted without the expressed written consent of the Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety.

1

Report Overview
In early 2009, an Exploratory Committee was formed to investigate the potential creation of a
Veterans Court in Maricopa County, Arizona. The Committee’s initial efforts have focused on
examining existing Veterans Courts and determining the size and scope of the problem (i.e., the
number of veterans in the county jail). This report provides an overview of information on
veterans in the Maricopa County Jail System, drawing on data collected by the Arizona Arrestee
Reporting Information Network (AARIN). This report is intended to assist the work of the
Veterans Court Exploratory Committee.
Background
Recent studies indicate that many military veterans returning from Iraq and Afghanistan suffer
from a number of mental health-related issues, often caused by Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder
(PTSD) and traumatic brain injuries. For example, the Army’s first study of the mental health of
troops who fought in Iraq found that about one in eight reported symptoms of post-traumatic
stress disorder. The survey also showed that less than half of those with problems sought help
(Associated Press, June 30, 2004). 1 The number of troops suffering from head injuries related to
combat are equally alarming. A recent study showed that 20 percent of all frontline infantry
troops suffer from concussions during combat (USA Today, May 2006). 2 Hoge et al. (2008) 3
surveyed 2,525 Army infantry soldiers three to four months after returning from deployment and
found that approximately 15 percent reported experiencing traumatic brain injury, defined as loss
of consciousness or altered mental status. The common signs and symptoms of these combatrelated conditions include: cognitive issues such as decreased attention span, lack of motivation,
irritability, depression and anxiety, increased fatigue, headaches, memory loss or disturbance,
disrupted sleep, and behavioral issues.
Perhaps not surprisingly, these symptoms may also lead to substance abuse and other forms of
anti-social behavior that draw the attention of the police and result in incarceration, where the
disorders go untreated and can worsen. Unfortunately, little is known regarding the links
between PTSD, traumatic brain injury and anti-social (or criminal) behavior among veterans –
and the extent to which veterans end up in the criminal justice system.
Veterans Courts
Recognizing the link between criminal conduct and service-related trauma, several jurisdictions,
most notably Buffalo, New York, have created specialized courts to handle veterans’ criminal
cases. Modeled after drug courts, the Veterans Court seeks to funnel clients into counseling and
support services that are closely supervised by a judge. In Buffalo, clients participate for
approximately one year, and if all requirements are met, the criminal charges are dismissed.
The Buffalo Veterans Court has garnered significant media attention, including coverage in USA
Today and National Public Radio. Perhaps not coincidentally, there have been a number of recent
initiatives at the federal level to facilitate alternative approaches to justice system-involved
veterans. For example, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, through the
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, began offering funding in 2008 for
2

community programs that divert people with trauma-related disorders — and especially veterans
— from the criminal justice system. Also, the Services, Education, and Rehabilitation for
Veterans (SERV) Act, was introduced by Senator John Kerry (D-MA) and Senator Lisa
Murkowski (R-AK) in July of 2008 to create veteran drug treatment courts. The SERV Act is
modeled on the Veterans Treatment Court in Buffalo. Similar Veterans Courts have been
established or are in development in Tulsa, Oklahoma, Anchorage, Alaska, Rochester, New York
and Orange County, California.
The Maricopa County Exploratory Committee
In early 2009, an Exploratory Committee was formed to investigate the potential creation of a
Veterans Court in Maricopa County, Arizona. The Committee, led by retired Superior Court
Judge Kenneth Fields, includes representatives from the courts, adult probation, the county
attorney’s office, public defender, mental health providers, and veterans advocates (Arizona
Republic, 1/6/09). 4 The Committee has engaged in a number of initial activities including
examination of the Buffalo court, and according to Arizona Republic, the Committee intends to
submit a proposal to Superior Court Presiding Judge Barbara Mundell by summer 2009.
One of the challenges facing the Exploratory Committee is the lack of available data
documenting the number of veterans in the county jail system. Little is also known about the
nature of their current charges, their criminal history, drug and alcohol use, and mental health
issues including PTSD and traumatic brain injury.
Methodology used in present study
The present study used interview data obtained from 617 recently booked adult male and female
arrestees at three booking facilities in Maricopa County, Arizona as part of the Arizona Arrestee
Reporting Information Network (AARIN). The Maricopa County Board of Supervisors
sponsored research at Arizona State University and established AARIN in January 2007 to
monitor drug use trends, treatment needs, and at-risk behavior among recently booked arrestees
in Maricopa County. Each calendar quarter, professionally trained local staff conduct voluntary
and anonymous interviews with adult males and females and juvenile boys and girls who have
been arrested within the past 48 hours.
The interviews for this report included the core instrument for the AARIN project, as well as a
detailed Veterans addendum. The Veterans Addendum was designed explicitly in response to
requested data needs from the Maricopa County Manager’s Office, specifically the Justice
Systems and Planning Information unit (JSPI). The Veterans Addendum was designed as a
threshold addendum, screening all AARIN participants for whether they had ever served in the
United States military, including the Coast Guard and National Guard. The addendum was
piloted in first quarter 2009.
For those respondents who identified themselves as veterans, questions were asked about
whether they served in Iraq or Afghanistan, the branch of service, length of service and
discharge, and the nature of their discharge. Additional questions asked about whether they
suffered a physical injury during their service, and if so, the type of injury. Finally, respondents
3

were asked if they had been diagnosed or treated for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD),
another mental health problem, or a substance abuse problem since their military service. If the
respondent indicated they had been diagnosed or treated for each of those conditions, they were
asked about the type of treatment received. They were also asked to explain why they had not
sought treatment, if that were the case.
Analysis for this report relied on our adult sample from first quarter 2009. Initially there were
697 adult arrestees approached for participation, and 617 of those who were eligible agreed to
participate and provided a valid urine specimen. Among the 617 completed interviews, there
were 43 respondents who reported veteran status (7%). The small number of veteran respondents
is insufficient to generalize to the larger arrestee population, though it does provide for an initial
review of preliminary findings. For a complete description of methodology, see Rodriguez,
2008. 5
Exhibit 1 shows the characteristics of the participating arrestee sample, specifically comparing
veterans and non-veterans. There were a few notable differences between veterans and nonveterans. Veterans were predominantly White (67.4% of veterans compared to 38.0% of nonveterans) and male (88.4% compared to 74.7% for non-veterans). Veterans were more likely to
be high school graduates and to have achieved post high school education. Specifically, only 7%
of veterans reported less than high school (compared to 39.2% of non-veterans), and nearly half
reported post high school education. Residency and employment status in the past 30 days were
similar for the two groups. On average, veterans were also older (40.4 years) than non-veterans
(30.6 years).

4

Exhibit 1: Characteristics of the Arrestee Population by Veteran Status
No
Have you ever served in the United States Military?

Yes

%

n

%

n

70.1

569

5.3

43

Non-Veteran
%
n

Veteran
%
n

Total
%
n
75.4

612

Total
%
n

Gender
Male
Female

74.7
25.3

425
144

88.4
11.6

38
5

75.7
24.3

467
150

Race/Ethnicity
Caucasian
African American
Hispanic
Other

38.0
10.9
39.2
12.0

216
62
223
68

67.4
11.6
16.3
4.7

29
5
7
2

40.0
10.9
37.6
11.4

245
67
230
70

Education
Did not Graduate H.S.
High School Diploma
Post High School

39.2
33.0
27.8

223
188
158

7.0
46.5
46.5

3
20
20

36.9
34.0
29.1

226
208
178

Residence last 30 days
Private Residence
Public or Group Housing
Incarcerated
Shelter
No Fixed Residence
Other

91.9
1.8
0.2
0.5
5.3
0.4

523
10
1
3
30
2

88.4
2.3
2.3
2.3
4.7
0.0

38
1
1
1
2
0

91.7
1.8
0.3
0.7
5.2
0.3

561
11
2
4
32
2

Income last 30 days
Work Full Time
Work Part Time
Welfare
Family or other legal sources
Prostitution/drug dealing
Other illegal sources
No income

33.9
22.6
10.5
16.3
3.4
5.5
7.8

191
127
59
92
19
31
44

33.3
21.4
26.2
7.1
7.1
2.4
2.4

14
9
11
3
3
1
1

33.9
22.5
11.6
15.7
3.6
5.3
7.4

205
136
70
95
22
32
45

Age (Mean)

30.6

40.4

31.3

5

Characteristics of Veterans’ Service
Exhibit 2 shows some basic characteristics of the veteran respondents’ military service. The table
shows the distribution of their branch and length of service, time since discharge, and the nature
of discharge. Most of the veterans in our sample served four years or less (86.1%), and had been
discharged 10 years or more ago (60.5%). More than 80% received an honorable or general
discharge.
Exhibit 2: Characteristics of Veterans’ Service
%

n

In which branch did you serve?
Army
Navy
Air Force
Marines
National Guard

53.5
14.0
7.0
18.6
7.0

23
6
3
8
3

How long did you serve?
Less than 1 Year
1 - 2 Years
3 - 4 Years
5 - 10 Years
More than 10 years

20.9
14.0
51.2
9.3
4.7

9
6
22
4
2

How long ago were you discharged?
Less than 1 Year
1 - 2 Years
3 - 4 Years
5 - 10 Years
More than 10 years

4.7
14.0
16.3
4.7
60.5

2
6
7
2
26

Describe the nature of your discharge?
Honorable
General
Other than Honorable
Bad Conduct
Dishonorable

65.1
16.3
11.6
0.0
7.0

28
7
5
0
3

Exhibit 3 shows the characteristics of the veterans’ time in service, specifically whether they
served in Iraq or Afghanistan since September 11, 2001, whether they were physically injured, or
have been diagnosed or treated for particular problems since their service. Only 21% of veterans
in our sample had served in Iraq or Afghanistan post-9/11. Problems associated with their
military service were relatively common, however. Nearly 28% had been physically injured,
6

26.5% had been diagnosed or treated for PTSD, 34.9% for another mental health problem, and
16.3% had been diagnosed or treated for a substance abuse problem since their military service.
Taken together, 24 of the 43 veterans in this study reported have at least one of the above
problems or issues (56%), and many reported multiple problems.
Exhibit 3: Characteristics of Veterans Time in Service
No
%
n

Yes
%
n

Total
%
n

Did you serve in Iraq or Afghanistan after
September 11, 2001?

79.1

34

20.9

9

100.0

43

Were you physically injured during military
service?

72.1

31

27.9

12

100.0

43

Have you been diagnosed or treated for PTSD since
your military service?

72.1

31

26.5

11

97.7

42

Have you been diagnosed or treated for mental
health problem other than PTSD since your military
service?

62.8

27

34.9

15

97.7

42

Have you been diagnosed or treated for substance
abuse since your military service?

81.4

35

16.3

7

97.7

42

Drug Use by Veteran Status
The AARIN instrument collects self-reported drug use information over the past month and year,
as well as drug test results from urine specimens collected at the time of the interview. Drug use
was common among the 43 veteran arrestees. Twenty-six (61%) reported any drug use during
the past year, and 17 (40%) reported any drug use in the past 30 days. Moreover, 14 (33%) tested
positive for an illegal substance at the time of the interview. Exhibit 4 below shows 12-month,
30-day, and urinalyses for marijuana, crack cocaine, powder cocaine, and methamphetamine by
veteran status. Past 12 month drug use was similar for veterans and non-veterans, although there
were a few notable differences. Specifically, we found that 30.2% of veterans reported having
used methamphetamine in the past 12 months, and 30.0% also tested positive for the drug. Nonveterans reported using methamphetamine in the past 12 months only 22.8% of the time, and
26.1% tested positive. Marijuana use in the past 12 months was similar, 44.2% among veterans
compared to 49.2% among non-veterans, but urinalysis results differed, with 27% of veterans
testing positive compared to 41% of non-veterans.

7

Exhibit 4: Drug Use by Veteran Status
Non-Veteran
%
n

Veteran
%
n

Total
%

n

19
11
8

48.9
38.9
40.6

602
240
217

16.3
9.3
10.0

7
4
3

12.3
7.1
12.5

76
44
67

48
31
64

11.6
7.0
10.0

5
3
3

8.6
5.5
12.5

53
34
67

130
100
132

30.2
16.3
30.0

13
7
9

23.4
17.5
26.4

144
108
141

Marijuana
Past 12 Months
Past 30 Days
Urinalysis

49.2
39.7
41.4

280
226
209

44.2
25.6
26.7

Powder Cocaine
Past 12 Months
Past 30 Days
Urinalysis

12.1
7.0
12.7

69
40
64

Crack Cocaine
Past 12 Months
Past 30 Days
Urinalysis

8.4
5.4
12.7

Methamphetamine
Past 12 Months
Past 30 Days
Urinalysis

22.8
17.6
26.1

Offense Severity by Veteran Status
Exhibit 5 below shows the most serious type of offense on the current arrest by veteran status.
Approximately 16% of veterans were arrested for violent charges, and 23.3% were arrested for
property charges. An additional 14% were arrested on drug charges. Most veterans were arrested
for miscellaneous offenses (46.5%), including disorderly conduct, failure to appear/pay fines,
driving on a suspended license, and probation violations. The current offense was similar among
veteran and non-veteran arrestees, though veterans were slightly less likely to be arrested on drug
charges.
Exhibit 5: Most Serious Current Charge by Veteran Status
Non-Veteran
Veteran
%
n
%
n
Violent
18.8
106
16.3
7
Drug
24.0
135
14.0
6
Property
21.5
121
23.3
10
Other
35.7
201
46.5
20
Mean # of Arrests (past year)

.83

1.14

Total
%
18.8
23.2
21.8
36.2

n
115
142
133
221
.85

8

Victimization by Veteran Status
Exhibit 6 displays whether the respondent reported having been the victim of a violent crime
during the past 12 months. The four categories of victimization were constructed from seven
questions: 1) have you been threatened with a gun; 2) have you been shot at; 3) have you been
shot; 4) have you been threatened with a weapon other than a gun; 5) have you been injured with
a weapon other than a gun; 6) have you been assaulted or attacked without a weapon; and 7)
have you been robbed.
In all four categories, veterans reported high rates of victimization. Among veterans, nearly half
(46.5%) reported being a victim of a firearm related crime in the past 12 months, and 39.5%
reported being victimized with another type of weapon. Assault and robbery victimization rates
were also high (30.2% and 20.9%, respectively). Taken together, 27 of the 43 veterans (63%) in
this study reported being victimized in the last 12 months. These victimization rates are
substantially higher than the rates experienced by no-veteran arrestees.
Exhibit 6: Victimization by Status
Non-Veteran
%
n
Victimized Past 12 Months
Gun Crime
Non-Gun Weapons Crime
Assaulted or Attacked
Robbed

15.1
16.3
18.8
12.3

86
93
107
70

Veteran
%
n
46.5
39.5
30.2
20.9

20
17
13
9

Total
%

n

17.3
17.9
19.6
12.9

106
110
120
79

9

Conclusion
This report presents information obtained from interviews of 617 recently booked arrestees in
Maricopa County, Arizona, as part of the Arizona Arrestee Reporting Information Network
(AARIN). The objective of this report is to provide basic information on the prevalence of
military veterans in the arrestee population, as well as background information on their military
service, demographics, and service-related problems.
Seven percent of the arrestees interviewed were military veterans (43 of 617). The 43 veteran
arrestees were primarily older white males who were well-educated. Most were discharged from
the military more than a decade ago – only 20% served in the current wars in Iraq and
Afghanistan. Many of the 43 veterans have problems either directly or indirectly related to their
military service including physical injuries, traumatic brain injuries, PTSD, other mental health
issues and substance abuse. Although most had not been arrested for serious charges and they
were not gang-involved, the veteran arrestees reported very high rates of victimization (i.e.,
being a victim of a crime).
Overall, though their number (and percentage) in the jail population is relatively small, the
veterans in this study suffer from a number of service-related problems and are likely in need of
medical and psychological services – as well as substance abuse treatment. Moreover, veteran
involvement in the criminal justice system is likely to increase substantially as soldiers currently
serving in Iraq and Afghanistan begin returning home in 2010-2011.

10

About the Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety
Arizona State University, in order to deepen its commitment to the communities of Arizona and
to society as a whole, has set a new standard for research universities, as modeled by the New
American University. Accordingly, ASU is measured not by whom we exclude, but by whom we
include.
The University is pursuing research that considers the public good and is assuming a greater
responsibility to our communities for economic, social, and cultural vitality. Social
embeddedness – university-wide, interactive, and mutually-supportive partnerships with Arizona
communities – is at the core of our development as a New American University.
Toward the goal of social embeddedness, in response to the growing need of our communities to
improve the public’s safety and well-being, in July 2005 ASU established the Center for
Violence Prevention and Community Safety. The Center’s mission is to generate, share, and
apply quality research and knowledge to create “best practice” standards.
Specifically, the Center evaluates policies and programs; analyzes and evaluates patterns and
causes of violence; develops strategies and programs; develops a clearinghouse of research
reports and “best practice” models; educates, trains, and provides technical assistance; and
facilitates the development and construction of databases.
For more information about the Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety, please
contact us using the information provided below.

MAILING ADDRESS
Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety
Arizona State University
P.O. Box 37100
Mail Code 3253
Phoenix, Arizona 85069-7100
PHONE
(602) 543-5959
WEB SITE
http://cvpcs.asu.edu

11

Endnotes
1

Associated Press (2004, June 30). 1 in 8 returning soldiers suffers from PTSD. Associated Press, Accessed:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5334479/ .

2

Zaroya, G. (2006, May 7). Troops risk undetected brain injury. USA Today. Accessed:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-06-06-brain-damage-main_x.htm ; Zaroya, G. (2006, May 7). Even
mild injuries to brain add-up. USA Today. Accessed: http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-06-06-braindamage_x.htm .

3

Hoge, C.W., McGurk, D., Thomas, J.L., Cox, A.L., Engel, C.C., and Castro, C.A. (2008). Mild traumatic brain
injury in U.S. soldiers returning from Iraq. The New England Journal of Medicine, 358, 453-63.

4

Hensley, J.J. (2009, January 6). New court is sought to aid vets charged with crimes. Arizona Republic.

5

Rodriguez, Nancy (2008), Arizona arrestee reporting information network: AARIN annual adult report 2007,
Phoenix, AZ: Arizona State University.

12

The Center for Violence Prevention and Community Safety l ASU College of Public Programs
4701 West Thunderbird Road, Phoenix, AZ l (602) 543-5959 l http://cvpcs.asu.edu