This article examines sentencing outcomes in 73 counties in Minnesota to appraise three theoretical approaches to sentencing: the formal legal theory of sentencing, which predicts that legal variables are the primary determinants of sentencing, the substantive political theory, which predicts that legal and social status variables determine sentencing, and the organizational maintenance theory, which predicts that legal and processing variables determine sentencing. The findings demonstrate that the effects of legal variables are important determinants of sentencing irrespective of the organizational context whereas the effects of plea are conditioned by the level of bureaucratization in courts. The results also suggest that racial effects on sentencing are curtailed in the context of sentencing guidelines.

The Organizational Context of Criminal Sentencing

Research on criminal sentencing, particularly on various types of disparity therein, has been an active field of inquiry for decades. This paper provides a conceptual survey of research on non-capital sentencing outcomes since 2000. I first look backward at the research agenda posed by reviews in the early 1980s, and in 2000. I then discuss theoretical developments in the study of sentencing in the 1990s and 2000s. I then provide an overview of recent sentencing research focused on the following: (1) court organizational and social contexts, (2) individual courtroom workgroup members, (3) disparity conditional on intersecting defendant characteristics, (4) victim characteristics, and (5) earlier case processing events and decisions. I then outline several directions for moving sentencing research forward into the next decade.

https://www.albany.edu/understanding-guilty-pleas/assets/Ulmer_2012.pdf

Recent Developments and New Directions in Sentencing Research

Using data from large urban courts for the years 1990–1996 and drawing from the “focal concerns” framework on case-process decision making, we examine the main and interactive effects of gender and race–ethnicity on sentence outcomes. The main focus of the present study is whether the effects of race–ethnicity (and gender) on sentence outcomes are similar or different across gender (and racial–ethnic) groups. Consistent with the findings of prior research, we find that female defendants receive more lenient sentences than male defendants and that black and Hispanic defendants receive less favorable treatment than white defendants. However, these main effects are strongly dependent on whether the sample is partitioned by gender or race–ethnicity. We find that race–ethnicity influences male but not female sentences. Conversely, gender strongly influences sentencing across all racial–ethnic groups. These findings are at odds with the traditional view that leniency in court sanctioning typically by-passes “women of color.” Instead, it appears that black and Hispanic female defendants actually benefit more from their “female” status than would be expected all else equal.

Does Gender Modify the Effects of Race–ethnicity on Criminal Sanctioning? Sentences for Male and Female White, Black, and Hispanic Defendants

Recent scholarship on criminal punishments increasingly highlights the importance of courtroom social contexts. Combining recent data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission (FY1997–2000) with aggregate data on federal districts, the current study examines interdistrict variations in the application of downward departures from the federal sentencing guidelines. Findings indicate that substantial variation exists in the probability of both prosecutor-initiated substantial assistance departures and judge-initiated downward departures. This variation is accounted for, in part, by organizational court contexts, such as caseload pressures, and by environmental considerations, such as the racial composition of the district. Additional evidence suggests that

/pdf/the-social-context-of-guidelines-circumvention-the-case-of-uipggrvcai.pdf

The social context of guidelines circumvention: the case of federal district courts*

In this study of prosecutors' charging decisions in sexual assault cases, we test the hypothesis that the effect of victim characteristics is conditioned by the relationship between the victim and the suspect. We categorize the victim/suspect relationship as one involving strangers, acquaintances/relatives, or intimate partners, and we examine the effect of victim, suspect, and case characteristics on charging decisions in each type of case. The results of our analysis reveal that the effect of victim characteristics, with one exception, is confined to cases involving acquaintances and intimate partners. In these types of cases, prosecutors were less likely to file charges if there were questions about the victim's character or behavior at the time of the incident. In contrast, the victim's reputation and behavior did not affect charging in cases involving strangers; in those types of cases, prosecutors were more likely to file charges if the suspect used a gun or knife or if the victim was white. We conc...

Donald J. Harris

Papers

The tenor of justice : criminal courts and the guilty plea process