The Sentencing Consequences of Federal Pretrial Supervision

2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 313-333 ◽  
Author(s):  
James C. Oleson ◽  
Christopher T. Lowenkamp ◽  
John Wooldredge ◽  
Marie VanNostrand ◽  
Timothy P. Cadigan
Keyword(s):  
Criminal History ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Prison Sentence ◽  
Pretrial Release ◽  
Pretrial Detention ◽  
Sentencing Decisions ◽  
Offense Severity ◽  
Gender And Age ◽  
Extralegal Factors ◽  
Sentencing Outcomes

Legal variables, such as offense severity and criminal history, principally shape sentencing decisions, but extralegal factors such as race, gender, and age also influence sentencing outcomes. Studies focusing on the effect of pretrial detention on sentencing outcomes usually associate pretrial detention with negative sentencing outcomes. The current study followed 90,037 federal defendants from indictment through sentencing, and measured the effects of pretrial detention on sentencing decisions. Detention (and, to a lesser degree, revocation of pretrial release) was associated with increased likelihood of receiving a prison sentence and greater sentence length, even when controlling for offense severity and criminal history scores.

Sentencing Outcomes in U.S. District Courts

2016 ◽  
Vol 63 (2) ◽  
pp. 137-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis W. Franklin
Keyword(s):  
Educational Attainment ◽  
General Pattern ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Current Analysis ◽  
Focal Concerns ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Extralegal Factors ◽  
Focal Concerns Theory ◽  
Sentencing Outcomes

Numerous studies have examined the influence of offender characteristics on sentencing outcomes, yet little attention has been afforded to offenders’ educational attainment. The focal concerns theory provides reason to suspect that greater educational attainment may insulate offenders from the effects of criminal stereotypes linked to extralegal factors, including race/ethnicity, age, and sex. The current analysis employs a sample of 115,674 federal offenders to test this assumption on the in/out and sentence length decisions. Results of the in/out models demonstrate a general pattern where the effects of several extralegal factors (i.e., race, ethnicity, age, sex, and detention) are reduced, and in some cases fully moderated, by offenders’ educational attainment. This pattern, however, is not apparent during the sentence length decision.

Drug sentencing in Brazil: factors influencing sentencing outcomes in the criminal courts of Recife/PE

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lais Meneses Brasileiro Dourado ◽  
Benedikt Fischer
Keyword(s):  
Drug Trafficking ◽  
Criminal History ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Vulnerable Groups ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Eligibility Criterion ◽  
Criminal Courts ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Sentencing Outcomes ◽  
Drug Sentencing

Purpose This paper aims to examine sentencing decisions for drug-trafficking offences in the criminal courts of the city of Recife to address a gap in quantitative research on drug sentencing and incarceration in Brazil. Design/methodology/approach Using original data obtained from the Court of Justice for Pernambuco, the research used multivariate regression analysis to investigate the effect of case processing, offender, and offence characteristics on sentence length. Findings A key finding of the research is the influence of two legal factors on sentence length: admitting to a drug-trafficking offence and being categorized as “mitigated trafficking”. Results also indicate that first-time defendants were more likely to be categorized as mitigated trafficking, stressing the importance of criminal history on predicting sentencing outcomes. “Mitigated trafficking” is a distinct category of drug-trafficking created by the Drug Law nº. 11.343 (2006) to protect defendants considered novices in the illicit drug market from receiving longer imprisonment sentences. Practical implications The findings suggest that the policy strategy of having a legal distinction for a specific type of defendant appears to be effective in impacting sentence length for drug-trafficking convictions. Future research could explore how similar strategies could be adopted to influence sentencing for other vulnerable groups. However, focussing on a defendant records or prior convictions as an eligibility criterion could disproportionately impact defendants who are caught in a cycle of re-offending for socio-economic reasons or a need to finance a substance use disorder. Originality/value This research address a gap in quantitative sentencing research in Brazil and contributes to the broader literature by presenting results that are aligned with previous studies conducted in North America.

The Joint Effects of Race, Ethnicity, Gender, and Age on the Incarceration and Sentence Length Decisions

2017 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. 203-222 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina L. Freiburger ◽  
Alyssa M. Sheeran
Keyword(s):  
Black Males ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Black Females ◽  
Sentencing Decisions ◽  
Race Effect ◽  
Gender And Age ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
And Gender ◽  
Ethnicity And Gender ◽  
Gender Interactions

The current study adds to the literature examining the effects of race, ethnicity, gender, and age on sentencing decisions. The results indicate that Black and male defendants were more likely to be incarcerated in jail as opposed to receiving a probation sentence than White and female defendants. When race, ethnicity, and gender interactions were considered, it appeared that the race effect was driven by Black males’ reduced likelihood to receive probation as opposed to jail. Black females were the least likely to be jailed. Age interactions revealed that being young disadvantaged Black males but advantaged other groups. The decision to incarcerate a defendant in jail versus prison was not significantly influenced by race, ethnicity, or gender. When sentence length was examined, Black males received significantly shorter jail sentences than all groups except Black females. When age was considered, Hispanic defendants 30–39 received longer jail sentences than almost every group.

A Multivariate Analysis of Incarceration and Sentence Length Decisions for Older Defendants

2018 ◽  
Vol 30 (7) ◽  
pp. 1064-1085 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina L. Freiburger ◽  
Kareem L. Jordan ◽  
Carly M. Hilinski-Rosick
Keyword(s):  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Policy Implications ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Sentencing Decisions ◽  
Offense Severity ◽  
Prior Record ◽  
Negative Effect ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Research And Policy

This study examines sentencing decisions for older defendants, and how legal and extralegal variables differently affect older defendants. Using data from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing, the results indicate that defendants above the age of 50 are less likely to be sentenced to prison and jail and are more likely to be sentenced to a community sanction. For sentence length, however, those aged 50 and above receive significant longer jail sentences than those aged 18 to 29 and longer prison sentences than both those aged 30 to 49 and 18 to 29. The results also indicate that offense severity and prior record have a more negative effect on older defendants during the incarceration decision. During the sentence length decision, however, the opposite is found for the effect of offense severity. These findings are discussed and are used to make suggestions for future research and policy implications.

Second Looks at Sentences under the First Step Act

2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (2) ◽  
pp. 76-85
Author(s):  
Sarah French Russell
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Length ◽  
Sentencing Decisions ◽  
Second Look ◽  
The People ◽  
The Law ◽  
Supervised Release ◽  
Federal Prisoners ◽  
Federal Judges ◽  
The Impact

Under the First Step Act of 2018, federal prisoners may now petition courts directly for reduction of their sentences, and judges may grant such requests if “extraordinary and compelling reasons” support reduction. Judges are also in the process of imposing reduced sentences in thousands of cases where the First Step Act has retroactively reduced statutory penalties. Not only does the First Step Act offer prisoners new opportunities for sentence reduction, but the law also may change how federal judges understand the impact of their sentencing decisions. Before now, in federal cases, judges rarely had the chance to take a second look at the prison sentences they (or their colleagues) imposed. Encounters between judges and the people they sentenced typically occurred only if a person violated the terms of supervised release after leaving prison. Now, judges can reassess sentence length while someone is still in prison and evaluate whether a reduction in the sentence is warranted. This newfound power allows judges to see their sentencing decisions in a new light and may influence how they conceive of the prison time they impose in future cases.

scholarly journals Honoring Innocent Until Proven Guilty

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 41-70
Author(s):  
Stephen Rispoli
Keyword(s):  
Rule Of Law ◽  
Prison Population ◽  
Good Reason ◽  
Economic Consequences ◽  
Default Rule ◽  
Pretrial Release ◽  
Pretrial Detention ◽  
Law System ◽  
Constitutional Protections ◽  
A Current

Texas’s current prison population consists of far more pretrial detainees than convicted criminals. Despite United States and Texas constitutional protections, the default rule in many jurisdictions, including Texas, detains misdemeanor and non-violent felony defendants unless they can post a monetary bond or get a surety to post the bond for them (“bail bond”) to obtain their release. Most pretrial detainees remain detained due not to their alleged dangerousness, but rather because they simply cannot afford to post bail (or get someone to post it for them). As a result, many pretrial detainees find themselves choosing between hamstringing their financial future or remaining in detention until trial. If Americans are serious about “honoring the presumption of innocence,” we must reform the way that misdemeanor and non-violent felony defendants are treated while awaiting trial. Rather than treat them as guilty and keep them in jail unless they can pay for their release, the standard should be to release them unless there is a very good reason for not doing so. By changing the default option from pretrial detention to pretrial release, many Texas judges will be more pre-disposed to release misdemeanor and non-violent felony defendants on conditions other than the posting of monetary bail. This switch will result in fewer people being detained simply because they cannot afford to be released—which will prevent adverse economic consequences to already disadvantaged citizens. Proposed reform has been discussed for decades. Reforming the bail system in Texas is a current, critical need. This criminal justice issue undermines the public’s faith in our system of justice and detrimentally affects the economic and social status of countless citizens who will ultimately be found not guilty. Doing nothing weakens our overall rule-of-law system and ultimately erodes the foundation upon which our society is built.

Introduction

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-22
Author(s):  
Richard S. Frase ◽  
Julian V. Roberts
Keyword(s):  
Criminal History ◽  
Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
Prison Inmates ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Racial Disproportionality ◽  
Nonviolent Offenders ◽  
Offense Severity ◽  
Large Numbers ◽  
Prior Record ◽  
Prison Populations

This chapter provides an overview of the book, including the following major topics: why this neglected topic is so important; the ubiquity of prior record enhancement in modern sentencing systems, and their particularly powerful roles in U.S. jurisdictions with sentencing guidelines; the wide variations in the criminal history scoring formulas used in guidelines, with respect to matters such as which prior crimes and other factors are included, the weight each receives, and the degree to which a high score increases recommended sentence severity; the unclear punishment rationales for such enhancements; and the numerous negative consequences of these enhancements— increasing the size and expense of prison populations, undermining the important goal of punishment in proportion to offense severity, increasing the need for prison beds to house property and other nonviolent offenders, generating large numbers of aging prison inmates, contributing to racial disproportionality in prison populations, and undermining offenders’ efforts to reintegrate into society.

Federal Sentencing Guidelines and United States v. Booker: Social Context and Sentencing Disparity

2015 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 45-66 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey S. Nowacki
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
Aggregate Level ◽  
Political Climate ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Federal Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
Federal Sentencing ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Sentencing Outcomes

The United States v. Booker decision rendered Federal Sentencing Guidelines advisory rather than mandatory. In the context of this decision, this study examines both the direct influence of aggregate-level political, community, and administrative variables on sentencing outcomes, and the way that such characteristics might contextualize individual-level predictors. Using multi-level regression techniques, this study examines the role of aggregate-level variables on sentence length decisions across four distinct time periods. Moreover, this article also examines whether aggregate-level variables condition the effects of race/ethnicity on sentencing outcomes. Whereas the direct effects of aggregate-level variables on sentencing outcomes are generally limited to political climate effects, there is evidence that political climate and other aggregate-level measures contextualize individual-level race/ethnicity effects. Future research should seek to better understand the specific mechanisms behind these relationships.

Analyzing Variation in Prior Record Penalties Across Conviction Offenses

2017 ◽  
Vol 64 (7) ◽  
pp. 831-855 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Cassidy ◽  
Jason Rydberg
Keyword(s):  
Sex Offenders ◽  
Length Distribution ◽  
Criminal History ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Empirical Examination ◽  
Focal Concerns ◽  
Prior Record ◽  
Conditional Sentence ◽  
Focal Concerns Perspective ◽  
The Impact

The focal concerns perspective suggests that criminal history and the nature of the offense interact to influence judicial assessments of community threat, yet this question has not been subject to systematic empirical examination. Drawing on 4 years of data (2007-2010) from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing ( N = 75,676), we utilize linear quantile mixed models (LQMM) to examine the impact of prior record on the conditional distribution of sentence lengths across violent, property, drug, and sex offenders, controlling for the effects of important individual and judicial district-level covariates. The results indicate that prior record penalties differ both between and within conviction offense types across the conditional sentence length distribution. Substantive, theoretical, and methodological implications are discussed.

An Examination of the Impacts of Gender, Race, and Ethnicity on the Judicial Processing of Offenders in Family Violence Cases

2017 ◽  
Vol 64 (13) ◽  
pp. 1663-1697 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tina L. Freiburger ◽  
Danielle Romain
Keyword(s):  
Family Violence ◽  
Race And Ethnicity ◽  
Ethnic Disparities ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Pretrial Release ◽  
Focal Concerns ◽  
White Offenders ◽  
Black Defendants ◽  
Focal Concerns Perspective ◽  
To Receive

Using the focal concerns perspective, the present study examined possible gender, race, and ethnic disparities on judges’ pretrial release, incarceration, and sentence length decisions in family violence cases. The results indicate that males were more likely to receive an order of bail (as opposed to release on own recognizance), received higher bail amounts, were less likely to make bail, were more likely to receive prison opposed to jail, and were incarcerated for significantly longer periods of time than women. Hispanic defendants were more likely than White defendants to receive higher bail amounts and were more likely to be detained until sentencing. Black defendants, on the other hand, were more likely to receive prison as opposed to jail than White offenders.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document