Psychiatric hospitalization history and parole decisions

The present study investigates the impact of a recent history of psychiatric hospitalization on obtaining parole for an exit cohort of male offenders. Legal variables (number of prior imprisonments, prior arrest for violent crime, use of violence in current offense, conviction for drug-related offense, history of drug use, and annual prison infraction rate), social and community support variables (marital status, education, area of conviction, family support, and occupation), and extralegal variables (race and age at release) are all examined, along with psychiatric hospitalization history, for their impact on the parole decision-making process and, ultimately, the percentage of maximum sentence served. The results from logistic regression and multiple regression indicate that psychiatric hospitalization history significantly reduces the likelihood of receiving parole and increases the percentage of maximum sentence served. This relationship persists once other variables have been controlled. Possible explanations and policy implications are discussed.     

Short‐Term Effects of Sanctioning Reform on Parole Officers' Revocation Decisions

Parole officials have traditionally been afforded considerable discretion when making sanctioning decisions to be able to tailor sanctions according to substantively rational concerns such as individuals' unique needs and situations. However, the application of substantive rationality in sanctioning can also generate unwanted disparities because sanctioning decisions may be based on extralegal factors that parole officials consider relevant. Concerns regarding disparate treatment of offender groups have prompted a number of states to consider adopting administrative violation response policies that emphasize formal rationality and uniformity by restricting parole officers' discretion and structuring sanctioning decisions according to legally relevant criteria. By emphasizing formal rationality in sanctioning, structured sanction policies present a dilemma for parole officers—uniformity versus individualized treatment. In 2005, the state of Ohio implemented an administrative violation response policy designed to reduce parole officers' reliance on revocation hearings and promote uniformity in sanctioning decisions. This study involved an examination of whether Ohio's shift to structured sanctioning coincided with differences in legal and extralegal effects on parole officers' decisions to pursue revocation hearings. Analyses of data collected before and after the implementation of the policy revealed a reduction in the number of revocation hearings officers pursued. Only modest increases in uniformity were observed, however, because there was little disparity resulting from officers' hearing decisions before the policy was put in place. These findings are discussed within perspectives on justice system actors' decision making.     

Trial venue decisions in juvenile cases: Mitigating and extralegal factors matter

Purpose . This study assessed whether the characteristics of juvenile offenders and their victims affected respondents' decisions regarding whether a juvenile offender should be transferred to the adult criminal justice system. Method . Participants (N = 758) read a scenario about a juvenile accused of murder and decided whether the youth should be tried as an adult or as a juvenile. The age of the offender (11‐, 13‐ or 15‐years‐old), the sex of the offender, abuse history and victim type (neighbour or father) were varied. After indicating jurisdictional preference, participants read a series of statements (e.g. importance of punishment) and rated how important each was in their decision. Results . Significant main effects and complex interactions between defendant gender, age and abuse history were found. In general, younger defendants were more likely than older defendants to be recommended for juvenile court. Overall, juvenile offenders with a history of child abuse received less harsh verdicts. For males, a history of abuse affected decisions about trial venue and verdict both alone and in combination with other factors such as age, sex and relationship to victim. Results supported a mediational model in which extralegal and mitigating factors influenced the importance of a ‘just desserts’ orientation, which, in turn, influenced jurisdictional decisions. Conclusion . Despite a recent tendency for policymakers to pass legislation that requires more juveniles be sent to adult courts, the present study suggests that the public does not support automatic transfers to adult courts and that mitigating factors are important to their jurisdictional decisions.     

The Effect of Pretrial Detention on Sentencing in Two Federal Districts

While a substantial body of research indicates that legal variables, such as offense severity and criminal history, principally shape sentencing decisions, other studies demonstrate that extralegal factors such as race, gender, and age influence sentencing outcomes, as well. The handful of studies focusing upon the effect of pretrial detention/release on sentencing outcomes indicate that pretrial detention is associated with greater lengths of incarceration. This study—the first to empirically examine the sentencing consequences of pretrial detention in the United States federal courts—employed a sample of 1,723 cases from two district courts (New Jersey and Pennsylvania Eastern). Pretrial detention and, to a lesser degree, revocation of granted pretrial supervision were associated with increased prison sentences; on the other hand, successfully completing a term of pretrial services supervision was associated with shorter sentence length. Implications for the federal criminal justice system are discussed.     

Predicting Pre-Adjudicatory Detention Decisions

Abstract

Findings from studies examining the impact of legal and extralegal characteristics in determining pre-adjudicatory detention within the juvenile justice system have been inconsistent. Logistic regression was used to examine the independent, and interaction, effects of certain legal and extralegal factors in the decision to detain juveniles in counties in two Northeastern states. The results suggest race continues to exert a significant effect on detention decisions when controlling for various legal and extralegal/nonlegal factors.     

Reassessing the Influence of Criminal History in Federal Criminal Courts

Abstract

Prior sentencing research indicates that defendants with more extensive criminal histories receive more punitive dispositions and that criminal history influences sentencing decisions over and above its influence on the guideline recommended sentence. To date, these additional effects of criminal history have almost exclusively been treated as linear effects. However, there are plausible reasons to expect that criminal history could have curvilinear effects on sentencing outcomes that taper off at higher scores. The purpose of this paper is to explore the potential curvilinear effects of defendant criminal history on incarceration, sentence length, and downward departure decisions in federal criminal courts. The findings suggest that criminal history has curvilinear effects on each of these sentencing outcomes. As criminal history category increases, defendants receive more severe sentences, net of other factors, but only up to a certain threshold level, at which point criminal history effects taper off and even reverse.     

The effects of legal and extra-legal characteristics on organizational victim decision-making

A variety of factors influence decisions to mobilize formal social control. With few exceptions, studies considering the effects of legal (e.g., case specific) and extra legal (e.g., offender and victim characteristics) variables have concentrated on sentencing under criminal law, an outcome subject to sample selection bias given that the majority of cases never reach this stage. Analyses of earlier decision points (e.g., victim calls for service, police use of force, and arrest), have focused on street crime and single jurisdictions. A neglected research context is the organizational victim’s response to employee fraud. Using a sample of 663 fraud cases, this study applies Black’s (The behavior of law, San Diego, Academic, 1976) theory of law to victim organizations’ decisions to mobilize formal social control. Results demonstrate that extralegal characteristics weigh heavily on decisions to initiate both criminal and civil outcomes. Specifically, offenders’ education and age decreased the odds of criminal legal mobilization. Mobilization of criminal law was also more likely by government agencies. Implications for Black’s theory and directions for further research are discussed.     

Liberating Discretion: The Effect of Rape Myth Factors on Prosecutors’ Decisions to Charge Suspects in Penetrative and Non-Penetrative Sex Offenses

Abstract

In sexual assault cases, prosecutorial charging decisions may be influenced by legal factors like offense seriousness and convictability and extralegal rape myths. We use data on sexual assaults in Los Angeles, to test for the effects of victim behavior, victim credibility, and “real rape” stereotypes on the decision to file charges. We also test the liberation hypothesis, examining whether rape myths influence the charge decision more in less serious nonpenetrative cases then in penetrative cases. Results show that victim credibility and behavior, but not consistency with real rape stereotypes, affect charging decisions, even after controlling for legally relevant factors, and they influence prosecutors’ charging decisions equally in penetrative and nonpenetrative cases. Rape myths also influence the charging decision indirectly via victim cooperation. We conclude that rape myths are incorporated into the criminal justice system’s definition of and response to sexual violence, so cannot be addressed by changing case screening policies.     

Location,location, location: Interdistrict and intercircuit variation in sentencing outcomes for federal drug-trafficking offenses

Research on sentencing has made clear that factors beyond case and offenders' attributes influence court decisions. Environmental and procedural characteristics also significantly affect the sentences of criminal courts. Yet, while state-level studies regularly control for such factors, most research on modern federal determinate sentencing has neglected jurisdictional attributes and variation as sources of extralegal sentence disparity. Using the organizational context and social worlds theoretical perspectives with a multilevel analytical approach, this study assessed how district and circuit of adjudication affect case-level lengths of sentences for federal drug-trafficking offenses, finding that both significantly affect sentencing outcomes and their predictors.     

Is a Plea Really a Bargain? An Empirical Study of Six Cities in China

There is a belief in the criminal justice system that it is better to take a plea offer to avoid uncertain consequences than risk going to trial. Prior studies using the data in Anglo-American courts have suggested that many legal and extralegal factors influence the decision of a guilty plea versus trial. China developed its own plea-bargaining system in 2016. Using 6826 DUI cases adjudicated in six cities, this study examines what factors affect the decision of a guilty plea and whether the guilty plea brings true benefits in Chinese courts. The results show that more serious crimes and more dangerous defendants were less likely to be disposed of through guilty pleas (as opposed to going to trial). One possible explanation is that prosecutors may make more punitive offers in these cases, which in turn discourages defendants from accepting them. In addition, using a propensity score weighting technique to control for potential confounding variables, this study finds that defendants who pleaded guilty were more likely to receive favorable case outcomes regarding pretrial detention and probation decision, which supports the argument that a guilty plea could help a defendant to avoid the “trial penalty” in Chinese criminal justice system.

     

The Right to Representation by Criminal Defense Counsel in Ethiopia: A Critical Analysis

This paper explores and critically reflects on the legal foundations and the practice of criminal defense in Ethiopia within the overall due process framework of a fair criminal trial. A brief review of Ethiopian constitutional history shows that the right to representation by legal counsel has been one of the fundamental due process rights granted to accused persons in criminal proceedings. The constitutional right to counsel is, however, not specified by detailed legal provisions. A logical consequence of this is that the enjoyment of this right is fraught with legal and practical problems. While the legal problems, among other things, include obscurity regarding the scope and content of the right, the practical problems include absence of public defense offices at district levels where the vast majority of criminal proceedings take place. Consequently, accused persons appear during trials without the aid of legal counsel; they are in fact deprived of their due process rights and marginalized. This has a number of legal ramifications both to the accused and the criminal justice system. In sum, the constitutional provision of the right to criminal defense counsel is undelivered and remains a hollow promise. It is therefore difficult to uphold the constitutional norms which underlie criminal trial process such as procedural justice, as well as the legitimacy of the government. The justice sectors are responsible to ensuring due process and equal protection. Substantial justice reforms are needed at all levels.     

Defining determinacy: Components of the sentencing process ensuring equity and release certainty

Determinate sentencing has gained in popularity in recent years, yet the specific meaning of determinacy is not universally accepted. Determinacy is viewed as a means for providing prisoners with release certainty, a mechanism for increasing fairness in the sentencing process, or both. The purpose of this paper is to define the components of determinacy and to articulate the conditions of the sentencing and post-adjudication process necessary to fulfill these criteria. The discussion of fairness in sentencing is restricted to issues of procedural equity, or the degree to which sentencing decisions are made reliably. Release predictability involves providing inmates early in their prison stays with knowledge concerning their release dates. Sentencing equity and predictability depend on how the sentencing model is structured to deal with a series of discretionary decisions affecting criminal defendants throughout the judicial and correctional process. Six choice points are considered, three pertaining to the adjudication process and three to the post-adjudication period. Relevant to the adjudication process are: (1) the decision to incarcerate; (2) characteristics of the penalty scaling system, including numbers of penalty ranges and offense categories, and overlap among penalty ranges; and (3) other mechanisms, including aggravating and mitigating circumstances and concurrent and consecutive sentences. The following post-adjudication processes were addressed: (4) the parole review process; (5) the use of good time; and (6) revocation from supervised release. Explication of the criteria for procedural equity and predictability should aid in defining parameters necessary for effective reform.     

AN ANALYSIS OF PAROLE DECISION MAKING USING A SAMPLE OF SEX OFFENDERS: A FOCAL CONCERNS PERSPECTIVE*

We use data from pre‐sentence investigations and official parole board records to study the correlates of parole release among a sample of men incarcerated for sexual offenses. Cox proportional hazard models are used to estimate change in the likelihood of parole over time, and the focal concerns theory provides the theoretical framework for the analyses. The findings suggest a complex interplay of legal and extralegal factors in understanding parole release decisions. Parole officials weigh heavily offense seriousness, institutional misconduct, and parole readiness scores in making release decisions. In addition, study results reveal that victim and offender age is a salient factor in determining parole judgments. Overall, the current analysis provides a baseline for future research on parole decision making in general, and sexual offenders, in particular.     

Beyond normative constraints: Declining institutionalism and the emergence of substantive and procedural justice

Popular notions of what it means to be put on trial invariably generate thoughts of the adversarial criminal trial, most often before a judge and jury. However, the criminal trial as the site for the testing of evidence of wrongdoing via a model of proof that proceeds according to prescribed processes in a normative institutional milieu is in decline. Controversially, this decline has been met with resistance from the legal profession, academics, policy makers and other stakeholders seeking to preserve the due process model that defines the criminal trial as an adversarial exchange between state and defendant. While the due process model continues to dominate as popular conceptualisation, the twenty-first century criminal trial has changed to such an extent that it is no longer seen as the quintessential form for the meting out of procedural fairness and testing of state's evidence, that emerged toward the end of the seventeenth century. Rather, the rise of control orders, modifications to the law of evidence, and the right of the accused to confront their accuser, together with the inclusion of non-traditional agents of justice, specifically victims and the community, has brought forward an era of substantive and procedural justice that lies beyond the normative constraints of the criminal trial. Robed counsel and bewigged judges beware; the advent of substantive and procedural justice has allowed for greater innovation transgressing the orthodoxies of criminal law in common law systems of justice. This paper will consider the virtues of the introduction of a transgressive criminal procedure.     

Criminal Prosecutions: Examining Prosecutorial Discretion and Charge Reductions in U.S. Federal District Courts

The role of the prosecutor in criminal punishments remains a fervent topic of criminal justice discourse, yet it has received limited empirical attention, particularly for U.S. Attorneys in federal district courts. The present study examines charging and sentencing outcomes in federal courts by combining charging data from the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts with sentencing data from the U.S. Sentencing Commission. The merger of these data sources overcomes limitations of each and provides for an investigation of the causes and consequences of federal prosecutorial charging decisions. Our investigation focuses on the subtle but important influences that extralegal offender characteristics exert in this process. Results indicate that some extralegal characteristics are intricately tied to the likelihood of charge reductions. Moreover, these effects sometimes interact to produce compound disadvantages for some groups of offenders. Our analyses are guided by contemporary theoretical perspectives on courtroom decision‐making.     

City police and drunk driving: Baseline data

Public attitudes, social movement organizations, and criminal justice laws regarding drunk driving have undergone significant changes in recent years. These changes raise important questions about police, who act as gatekeepers for the rest of the criminal justice system. Very little, however, is known about what police did in the years when drunk driving was viewed as a less serious social problem or about what police do now. I attempt to answer the first of these questions using data collected in the early 1970s, an important, largely unexamined period in the history of city police and drunk driving. The data provide a baseline for contemporary research. City police did not give contacts with drunk drivers a high priority, preferred to avoid these encounters, and made arrests on the basis of both legal and extralegal factors; extralegal factors were more important than legal factors. I examine the implications of the baseline data for contemporary policing.     

Burnout—Age at release from prison and recidivism

Empirical studies frequently have reported an association between age at release from prison and recidivism. For criminal justice decision-makers who wish to consider this knowledge in making prosecutorial, sentencing, or parole decisions, the magnitude of that association must be established while controlling for the effects of other variables known to be associated with recidivism (e.g., prior criminal record). This research addresses this issue using data from a large sample of federal prison releasees. The results indicate that recidivism rates do decline with increased age, and that the association is not diminished when statistical control is exercised for the effect of prior criminal record.     

论"罪疑唯轻"原则下刑事被告之举证负担

罪疑唯轻是刑事法中的重要裁判原则,裁判者在犯罪事实存在疑问时必须作出有利于被告的裁判.如果公诉方不履行法定的证明责任,或者刑事被告提起"有事实根据的合理怀疑"使案件事实真伪不明时,裁判者应当遵守罪疑唯轻原则作出有利于刑事被告的判决."选择确定"本质上是罪疑唯轻原则例外,但刑事被告在选择确定中仍无需承担主观的举证责任,只承担客观的证明责任.在程序性事项上,除重大的影响刑事被告权利的事项外,罪疑唯轻无适用余地.     

A sociolegal analysis of Canadian youth justice: The impact of offender's race on judicial decisions

There is evidence to suggest that even within ostensibly egalitarian systems of justice young offenders are, at least in part, socially selected. Police, court workers, lawyers, and judges make prejudgments of young offenders on the basis of extralegal as well as legal factors. This study examined the influence of extralegal variables, especially offender's race, on judicial outcomes including detention on arrest, plea, adjudication, and sentencing. While the principal focus was the effect of offender's race, the effects of other attributes including sex, age, family support, and counsel status were incorporated into the analysis to present a comprehensive explanatory model of justice.Loglinear/logit modelling techniques were employed to assess the simultaneous effects of social and legal variables. In summary, the data consistently supported the claim that at all levels of the justice process extralegal variables, most noticeably race, had a substantial systematic influence on judicial decisions, especially when seriousness of offense and criminal record were controlled. Most importantly, the study showed that the effects of race occured primarily in interaction with both legal and extralegal factors.     

Gender and Case Processing Decisions

ABSTRACT

Research conducted during the past twenty years has not provided definitive answers to questions concerning the effect of gender on criminal justice decision making. Some researchers conclude that females receive preferential treatment, while other conclude either that there are no differences or that females are treated more harshly than males. This study uses data on male and female defendants charged with violent felonies to examine the effect of gender on seven case processing decisions. We also probe for interactions between defendant gender and defendant race. We find that female defendants are more likely than male defendants to have all of the charges against them dismissed and that females are sentenced less harshly than males. We also find that gender and race interact. The results of our analysis cast doubt on the validity of the so-called “evil woman thesis” and highlight the importance of testing an interactive model that incorporates the effects of both gender and race.