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.

The Processing of Homicides in the Courts: An Examination of Multiple Case Outcomes

2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 400-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesenia M. Pizarro ◽  
Kristen M. Zgoba ◽  
Laura M. Salerno ◽  
Giovanni Circo
Keyword(s):  
Sentence Length ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Ethnic Variation ◽  
Focal Concerns ◽  
Decision Points ◽  
Multiple Case ◽  
Research Questions ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Court Dispositions ◽  
Focal Concerns Theory

The current study employs focal concerns theory to address the role that race/ethnicity plays on various court dispositions of homicide offenders in Newark, NJ, a location where the majority of residents are African American and Latino. Two research questions are examined: (1) Does ethnicity play an important role in the decision to dismiss a case against a homicide offender, convict via a plea deal, convict via trial, acquit via trial, and sentence length? and (2) Which legal and extralegal factors play a role in these decision points during the processing of homicide offenders? The findings suggest that when there is little ethnic variation of defendants, victims, and the citizenry, other extralegal variables take precedence in informing the focal concerns of court actors. The results also suggest that different legal and extralegal variables affect the odds of distinct court outcomes. Implications for theory and future research are discussed.

Extralegal Disparity in the Application of Intermediate Sanctions: An Analysis of U.S. District Courts

2015 ◽  
Vol 63 (7) ◽  
pp. 839-874 ◽  
Author(s):  
Travis W. Franklin ◽  
Layne Dittmann ◽  
Tri Keah S. Henry
Keyword(s):  
Educational Attainment ◽  
Federal Courts ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Interactive Effects ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Potential Influence ◽  
Offender Characteristics ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Intermediate Sanctions

The sentencing literature is replete with studies that have examined the influence of extralegal offender characteristics on two key sentence outcomes: the imprisonment and sentence length decisions. Yet the study of other outcomes, such as the application of intermediate sanctions, is rarely addressed. To date, no studies have been conducted in the federal courts to examine the potential influence of race/ethnicity, age, gender, and educational attainment on the decision to apply intermediate sanctions. Consequently, the present analysis employs U.S. Sentencing Commission data to examine direct and interactive effects of these extralegal characteristics on this understudied outcome. Findings indicate that extralegal effects may play an important role in the use of intermediate sanctions. The implications of this research are discussed in detail.

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.

Revisiting the Normal Crime and Liberation Hypotheses

2012 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 214-238 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jawjeong Wu ◽  
Miriam A. DeLone
Keyword(s):  
Federal District ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Interactive Effects ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Citizenship Status ◽  
Research Gap ◽  
Liberation Hypothesis ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Primary Variable ◽  
Federal District Courts

The established sentencing scholarship focusing on race/ethnicity and sentencing disparity indicates that the effect of race/ethnicity on sentencing severity varies across offense types. However, it is not clear whether this argument holds true when race/ethnicity is replaced with offender citizenship status as the primary variable of interest. In light of the research gap, this study extends beyond the existing literature exclusively on race/ethnicity by investigating the nexus between citizenship status, offense types, and sentencing outcomes through the normal crime hypothesis and the liberation hypothesis. Using the Monitoring of Federal Criminal Sentences data that include information on all offenders sentenced in 17 federal district courts for fiscal years 2006–2008, the present study assesses the independent and interactive effects of citizenship status and offense types on the judicial sentence length decision. Findings reveal that although models fail to support the normal crime hypothesis, there is robust support for the liberation hypothesis.

Trends in Sentencing of Federal Drug Offenders: Findings From U.S. District Courts 2002–2017

2020 ◽  
Vol 51 (1) ◽  
pp. 84-108
Author(s):  
Alexander Testa ◽  
Jacqueline G. Lee
Keyword(s):  
Ordinary Least Squares ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Least Squares Regression ◽  
Prison Sentence ◽  
Criminal Sentencing ◽  
Drug Offenders ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Substantial Heterogeneity ◽  
Over Time ◽  
Sentencing Outcomes

This study uses 16 years (2002–2017) of federal criminal drug sentences from the U.S. Sentencing Commission (USSC) to examine trends in two criminal sentencing outcomes: whether a defendant received a prison sentence and the length of a prison sentence. Logistic and ordinary least squares regression analyses were used to assess criminal sentencing outcomes. Moderation analyses are conducted to assess variation in sentencing for specific drug offenses over time. Results demonstrate that sentencing for federal drug crimes has become less severe over time. However, there is substantial heterogeneity in sentencing across different drug types, with pharmaceutical opioid cases receiving the least leniency over time regarding the incarceration decision and methamphetamine cases experiencing the lowest reduction in the length of prison sentences from 2002 to 2017. Finally, our analysis stratified by race/ethnicity suggested that there is heterogeneity in sentencing outcomes for federal drug offenders, conditional on racial and ethnic background.

scholarly journals An intersectional approach to race/ethnicity, sex, and age disparity in federal sentencing outcomes: An examination of policy across time periods

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 97-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey S Nowacki
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Ordinary Least Squares ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Least Squares Regression ◽  
Federal Sentencing ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Time Periods ◽  
Changing Role ◽  
Sentencing Outcomes

Approaches to intersectionality stress the importance of recognizing multiple, intersecting inequalities. As such, recent sentencing research has examined the changing role of extra-legal characteristics on United States federal sentencing outcomes in the aftermath of recent policy changes (e.g. United States v. Booker), but scholarship has less often examined these characteristics at the intersections of race/ethnicity, gender, and, especially age. This article uses an intersectional approach to examine the influence of these characteristics net of legally relevant characteristics. Using ordinary least squares regression procedures, the author examines the role of the joint effects of extra-legal variables on sentence length decisions across four distinct time periods. Net of control variables, results indicate that young black men are the group most likely to receive the longest sentences, but interesting differences between other groups also emerge.

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.

Financial Dependents and Sentencing Outcomes in Federal District Courts: Variation by Race, Ethnicity, and Sex

2020 ◽  
pp. 088740342094393
Author(s):  
Alexander Testa ◽  
Richard D. Hartley
Keyword(s):  
Positive Association ◽  
Federal District ◽  
The United States ◽  
Family Characteristics ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Theoretical Perspectives ◽  
Race Ethnicity ◽  
Using Data ◽  
Hispanic Male ◽  
Sentencing Outcomes

A voluminous literature has detailed disparities in punishment related to extra-legal characteristics such as race, ethnicity, and sex. However, less research has investigated the specific contexts and conditions under which disparities in punishment emerge. Specifically, limited research to date has examined whether family characteristics influence sentencing both directly, and in interaction with race, ethnicity, and sex. The current study investigates this question using data on federal criminal sentences from the United States Sentencing Commission for fiscal years 2015–2017. Findings demonstrate that providing support for dependents generally has a positive association with the likelihood of being incarcerated and overall sentence length. Moreover, the positive association between support for dependents and punishment severity is concentrated among Black male and Hispanic male defendants. Among minority females and White defendants, having dependents has either a negative or null association with sentencing outcomes. Findings are discussed in the context of contemporary theoretical perspectives of punishment.

scholarly journals Complicating Race

2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amanda M. Petersen
Keyword(s):  
Facial Feature ◽  
Past Research ◽  
Sentence Length ◽  
Facial Features ◽  
Racial Categories ◽  
Black Females ◽  
Focal Concerns ◽  
Relevant Variables ◽  
Focal Concerns Perspective ◽  
Sentencing Outcomes

Much research on race and sentencing utilizes broad racial categories to estimate the effect of race on sentencing outcomes; however, more nuanced conceptualizations of race have begun to appear in the literature. Specifically, a small but growing body of literature has assessed the role of discrimination based on Black stereotypicality of facial features, or Afrocentric facial feature bias, on sentencing outcomes for convicted males. By using Department of Corrections data from Black females and males incarcerated in Oregon, paired with experimentally derived facial feature ratings, this study extends past research by conducting both sex and race analyses in a new locale. These analyses are theoretically contextualized in feature-trait stereotyping and the focal concerns perspective—two previously unrelated literatures. The regression of sentence length on Afrocentric facial features, other extralegal factors, and legally relevant factors suggests that Afrocentric facial features do not explain sentence length for females. Afrocentricity predicts sentence length for males in the univariate and extralegal models, but significance is diminished with the inclusion of legally relevant variables. In interactional models, the sentence lengths of Black females and males do not vary in relation to one another either before or after the inclusion of legal factors. These findings are discussed in light of sentencing mechanisms in the state of Oregon, possible stereotype bias at earlier stages in the court process, and the racialized nature of offense histories and seriousness ratings.

scholarly journals Police Stop and Frisk and the Impact of Race: A Focal Concerns Theory Approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (6) ◽  
pp. 230
Author(s):  
Anthony Vito ◽  
George Higgins ◽  
Gennaro Vito
Keyword(s):  
Racial Differences ◽  
Theory Approach ◽  
Stop And Frisk ◽  
Focal Concerns ◽  
Police Decision Making ◽  
Reasonable Suspicion ◽  
Quasi Experimental ◽  
Verbal Threat ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Focal Concerns Theory

The findings of this study outline the racial differences in stop and frisk decisions by Illinois officers in consent searches and those based upon reasonable suspicion within the context of the elements of focal concerns theory. The analysis for this study was performed using propensity score matching (PSM) and allowed the researchers to create a quasi-experimental design to examine the race of the citizen and police decision making. According to our analysis of official Illinois law enforcement data, Black citizens, particularly males, were less likely to give their consent to a stop and frisk search. Black male citizens were also more likely to be stopped and searched due to an assessment of reasonable suspicion by the officer. Elements of focal concerns theory were also factors in pedestrian stops under conditions of consent and reasonable suspicion. Citizens judged as blameworthy were more likely to be stopped and frisked under conditions of consent and reasonable suspicion. The effect of a verbal threat and the officer’s prior knowledge about the citizen had even more significant impacts.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document