RACIAL AND ETHNIC DIFFERENCES IN PRETRIAL RELEASE DECISIONS AND OUTCOMES: A COMPARISON OF HISPANIC,BLACK, AND WHITE FELONY ARRESTEES*

The present study uses data on the processing of felony defendants in large urban courts to examine Hispanic, black, and white differences at the pretrial release stage. The major finding is that Hispanic defendants are more likely to be detained than white and black defendants. And, racial/ethnic differences are most pronounced in drug cases. In fact, Hispanic defendants suffer a triple burden at the pretrial release stage as they are the group most likely to be required to pay bail to gain release, the group that receives the highest bail amounts, and the group least able to pay bail. These findings are consistent with a focal concerns perspective of criminal case processing that suggests Hispanics as a newly immigrated group are especially prone to harsher treatment in the criminal case process.     

Bail agents and bounty hunters: Adversaries or allies of the justice system?

Bounty hunters are employed by the bail industry to locate and apprehend criminal defendants who “skip” bail and, subsequently, fail to appear for court appointments. While some scholars have examined bounty hunters, this work is concerned primarily with the origins, history, and legal challenges to the industry and its practices. Popular literature on this subject has created the “myth” of the bounty hunter, but it has failed to provide an accurate portrayal of the activities these individuals perform. Through the use of field research methods, this study provides a better understanding of the role that bail agents and bounty hunters play in the criminal justice system.     

Static and Dynamic Indicators of Minority Threat in Sentencing Outcomes: A Multi-Level Analysis

Designation as a “Habitual Offender” is an enhanced form of punishment which unlike, “Three Strikes” or “10-20-Life,” is entirely discretionary. We use Hierarchical Generalized Linear Modeling to assess the direct effects of race and Latino ethnicity on the designation of Habitual Offenders as well as the effect of both static and dynamic indicators of racial and ethnic threat on those outcomes. Our data include 26,740 adults sentenced to prison in Florida between 2002 and 2004 who were statutorily eligible to be sentenced as Habitual. The odds of receiving this designation are significantly increased for black and Latino defendants as compared to whites, though race and ethnicity effects vary substantially by crime type, being strongest for drug offenses and negligible for violent crimes. Static measures of group level threat (% black and % Latino) have no cross-level effect on sentencing by race or Latino ethnicity. However, increasing black population over time increases the odds of being sentenced as Habitual for both black and Latino defendants. Increasing Latino population increases the odds of Habitual Offender sentencing for Latinos, but decreases it for blacks. The prospect of engaging dynamic as opposed to static measures of threat in future criminal justice and other social control research is discussed.     

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

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.

Racial and ethnic disparity in pretrial criminal processing

This study uses data on the processing of felony defendants in large urban courts to analyze racial and ethnic disparities in pretrial processing. There are three major findings. First, racial disparity is most notable during the decision to deny bail and for defendants charged with violent crimes. Second, ethnic disparity is most notable during the decision to grant a non‐financial release and for defendants charged with drug crimes. Third, when there is disparity in the treatment of Black and Latino defendants with similar legal characteristics, Latinos always receive the less beneficial decisions. These findings are consistent with the theoretical perspective offered, which suggests that stereotypes influence criminal processing when their specific content is made salient by either the concerns relevant to a particular processing decision or the crime type of a defendant’s primary charge.     

Race as a Factor in the Judicial Decision of Bail Amount in a Midwestern Jurisdiction

Abstract

Data collected on all felony defendants during 1996 from a district court in a Midwestern county were examined for racial differences in the setting of bail. While we hypothesized that African Americans would receive higher bail amounts than whites, we found no independent effect of race on bail amounts either before or after applying controls for legal variables-seriousness of offense and prior arrests-and extralegal variables-sex, age, residency, and type of attorney. Thus, we were compelled to reject our hypothesis. Seriousness of offense and the interaction between offense seriousness and race were statistically significant in the regressions.     

Screening law enforcement cadets with the MMPI: An analysis of adverse impact

The MMPI was investigated for adverse impact against Blacks and Hispanics in a simulated employment selection procedure. Law enforcement academy cadets, who had received no preemployment psychological screening, took the MMPI on their first training day. The sample consisted of 184 males and 87 females with a mean age of 25.8 years. Twenty-five subjects were Black; 35 were Hispanic; and the remainder were white. Two clinical psychologists conducted a blind sort of the profiles, judging each as “acceptable” or “unacceptable” for employment as a law enforcement officer. Significant agreement was found for clinicians' judgments of suitablitity with no significant difference being found for either their overall acceptance rates or their acceptance rates for the different racial/ethnic groups. Also, there was no violation of the four-fifths rule. Analysis of variance found significant variability between groups on scales L and 6 (Pa) of the MMPI.     

Race and decision making within juvenile justice: The importance of context

Previous tests of the influence of race on decision making within juvenile justice proceedings have traditionally focused on case-level variables and/or macrolevel factors that characterize the jurisdictions under study. Often excluded are measures of the attitudinal context within which decision making occurs. Using a revised conflict perspective that incorporates the role of racial stereotyping, hypotheses are developed centering on racial differences in case processing decisions within four midwest jurisdictions. Attitudes of juvenile court officials toward the punitiveness of the juvenile court and perceptions regarding differences between the behavior and attitudes of whites and those of African Americans are included in additive and race interactive models of five decision-making stages. Results indicate both lenient and harsh treatment of African Americans compared to whites. Hypotheses regarding racial stereotyping in the decision-making process receive some support and the discussion focuses on how inconsistent racial effects may be a function of variation in structural “coupling” across system decision points.     

Capital Jury Deliberation: Effects on Death Sentencing,Comprehension, and Discrimination

This study focused on whether and how deliberations affected the comprehension of capital penalty phase jury instructions and patterns of racially discriminatory death sentencing. Jury-eligible subjects were randomly assigned to view one of four versions of a simulated capital penalty trial in which the race of defendant (Black or White) and the race of victim (Black or White) were varied orthogonally. The participants provided their initial “straw” sentencing verdicts individually and then deliberated in simulated 4–7 person “juries.” Results indicated that deliberation created a punitive rather than lenient shift in the jurors’ death sentencing behavior, failed to improve characteristically poor instructional comprehension, did not reduce the tendency for jurors to misuse penalty phase evidence (especially, mitigation), and exacerbated the tendency among White mock jurors to sentence Black defendants to death more often than White defendants.     

The effect of race and gender on bail outcomes: A test of an interactive model

This paper responds to suggestions that researchers interested in the relationship between defendant race, defendant gender, and criminal justice outcomes broaden their focus to include pretrial decision making. We used data on defendants charged with violent felonies in Detroit Recorder’s Court to analyze the effect of race and gender on the amount of bail imposed by the judge and on the defendant’s pretrial status. We found that judges take gender, but not race, into account in determining the amount of bail for certain types of cases; more specifically, Black females faced lower bail than Black males in less serious cases. In contrast, we found that both race and gender affected the likelihood of pretrial release. White defendants were more likely than black defendants to be released pending trial and females were more likely than males to be released prior to trial. In fact, white females, white males, and black females all were more likely than black males to be released. An earlier version of this mansucript was presented at the annual meeting of the American Society of Criminology, Phoenix, AZ, October, 1993.     

The Impact of Race on the Pretrial Decision

This study examined the effect of race on the pretrial release decision for drug offenders. Although this decision point has not been examined as extensively as the final sentencing decision, it is a critical discretion point which impacts defendants’ future sentencing outcomes. The results found that race had a significant impact on judges’ decisions to release a defendant on recognizance, with black defendants less likely to receive this release status. Race was not significant, however, in the decision of bail amount or in the likelihood to post bail. These results are consistent with the focal concerns perspective which suggests that black defendants are viewed by courts as more dangerous and blameworthy and thereby, less likely to be released on their own recognizance.     

Implications of the Minority Identity Development Model for jury consultants

Jurors from racial and ethnic minority, groups are often stereotyped as favoring the “underdog.” The problem with this generalization is that it ignores minority identity development as a within-group variable. This paper describes five stages of the Minority Identity Development (MID) Model and its implications for jury consultants.     

The Powell Hypothesis: Race and non-capital sentences for murder in Kentucky, 1976–1991

The 1987 U.S. Supreme Court decision McCleskey v. Kemp ruled, in part, that the findings of the Baldus study, offered by the petitioner to support a claim of racial bias in death penalty cases, were insufficient to demonstrate unconstitutional discrimination under the Fourteenth Amendment. Justice Lewis Powell offered additional justification for the ruling when he wrote, “If we accepted McCleskey’s claim that racial bias has impermissibly tainted the capital sentencing decision, we could soon be faced with similar claims as to other types of penalty. ” This statement has become labeled as the “Powell Hypothesis. ” This paper tests the “Powell Hypothesis” to determine whether race has an impact on sentences levied in noncapital murder cases in Kentucky between 1976 and 1991. The results indicate racial factors influenced sentence length in these cases.     

Hispanics and the death penalty: Discriminatory charging practices in San Joaquin County, California

Following reinstatement of the death penalty after the Supreme Court's decision in Gregg v. Georgia (1976), social scientists carefully documented evidence of racial and gender bias against defendants and victims at all stages of the death penalty system, from charging to conviction and sentencing. Despite these consistent findings, questions remained. One crucial unknown was whether or not racial bias uncovered in investigations of African Americans and Whites also negatively impacted members of other minority groups, in particular the largest minority group in the U.S.-Hispanics. Are Hispanics, as both victims and defendants, treated more like non-Hispanic Whites or African Americans? This research examined all death-eligible homicides in San Joaquin County, California from 1977 through 1986. Using logistic regression analysis, the investigation uncovered patterns of racial and gender bias, finding defendants in Hispanic victim cases were less likely to face a death-eligible charge than defendants in White victim cases. Evidence of discrimination may have implications for how Hispanic integration and race and ethnicity are understood and for evaluating the success of statutory reforms designed to insure fairness and constitutionality of the death penalty.     

Demography of the Legal Profession and Racial Disparities in Sentencing

The demography of the legal profession has changed rather dramatically in recent decades, yet the consequences of a more racially and ethnically diverse pool of lawyers for the administration of justice have not received significant attention. The present research examines how the racial composition of the local legal profession affects one facet of criminal law: the sentencing of convicted defendants. Building on prior work in the fields of law, stratification, and mobility, we hypothesize that racial and ethnic disparities in sentencing are mitigated where the legal profession is more diverse. In line with this hypothesis, analysis of data from a sample of large urban counties taken between 1990 and 2002 shows that the black-white racial disparity in sentencing attenuates as the number of black attorneys in the county increases, net of the percent black in the county and other possible confounding variables. Comparable results are found for Hispanics. The findings are discussed in the context of a demographically changing legal profession and prior work on racial disparities in the justice system.     

CUMULATIVE DISADVANTAGE: EXAMINING RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISPARITY IN PROSECUTION AND SENTENCING

Current research on criminal case processing typically examines a single decision‐making point, so drawing reliable conclusions about the impact that factors such as defendants’ race or ethnicity exert across successive stages of the justice system is difficult. Using data from the New York County District Attorney's Office that tracks 185,275 diverse criminal cases, this study assesses racial and ethnic disparity for multiple discretionary points of prosecution and sentencing. Findings from multivariate logistic regression analyses demonstrate that the effects of race and ethnicity vary by discretionary point and offense category. Black and Latino defendants were more likely than White defendants to be detained, to receive a custodial plea offer, and to be incarcerated—and they received especially punitive outcomes for person offenses—but were more likely to benefit from case dismissals. The findings for Asian defendants were less consistent but suggest they were the least likely to be detained, to receive custodial offers, and to be incarcerated. These findings are discussed in the context of contemporary theoretical perspectives on racial bias and cumulative disadvantage in the justice system.     

In Search of Respect: Examining Arrestee Satisfaction with Police

Recent research suggests that attitudes toward police hinge upon the procedures officers use in their interactions with the public. Using survey data collected from a sample of adults arrested and booked into a local jail in Washington County, Arkansas, this paper examines some of the factors that influence arrestees’ satisfaction with police. Results reveal that the most important factor influencing arrestees’ opinions of police was their belief in the benevolence of police actions, followed by their perceptions of the effectiveness of police, whether or not their arresting officer treated them with respect, racial group membership, and total household income. These findings lend support to the “normative” or “process-based” model of policing. The authors discuss the implications of these findings for police and jail administrators.     

He Versus She: A Gender-Specific Analysis of Legal and Extralegal Effects on Pretrial Release for Felony Defendants

The current study sought to identify significant predictors of pretrial processing for both male and female defendants in an aggregate sample. The data used in this study were taken from the State Court Processing Statistics, 1990–2000: Felony Defendants in Large Urban Counties (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2004 Bureau of Justice Statistics . ( 2004 ). State court processing statistics, 1990–2000: Felony defendants in large urban counties [ Computer file ]. Ann Arbor , MI : Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research . [Google Scholar]). The original sample included a total of 87,437 felony cases. The relationships between relevant independent variables and 5 separate dependent variables (denial of bail, non-financial release, amount of bail set, making bail, and pretrial incarceration) were analyzed using both multivariate regression and Z-score comparisons within gender-specific models. Findings suggest that the effects of certain independent variables on pretrial release decisions and outcomes are different between the gender-specific models.     

Analytical Rigor in Studies of Disparities in Criminal Case Processing

Studies of racial/ethnic disparities in criminal case processing have yielded mixed results. Some differences in findings have probably resulted from analyses of different social settings, but some could be attributable to differences in analytical rigor between studies. Contextual analyses are pointless unless the research yields unbiased estimates of the true relationships between a defendant's race/ethnicity and case dispositions. This goal may be furthered by conducting analyses that simultaneously incorporate the following: (a) corrections for sample bias, (b) analyses of several stages of case processing, (c) measures of prior record and offense seriousness which maximize explained variation in the dependent variables examined, (d) statistical controls for extralegal variables that correlate with case dispositions, and (e) more rigorous statistical tests for interactions. To demonstrate potential differences in findings from analyses with and without these characteristics, results from a study of 1586 Mexican- and Anglo-American defendants from Dona Ana County, New Mexico, are presented.     

Criminal defense counsels,district attorneys,and the insanity plea: A modest difference of opinion

This research examines differences between samples of 166 city and county prosecutors and 118 defense attorneys from Virginia, Tennessee, and Kentucky concerning their views toward the insanity plea in felony cases. Currently, tests for insanity used by the states are the M’Naghten rule, the ALI Model Penal Code test, and the Smith “irresistible impulse” test or combinations thereof. Defense counsels greatly favor the prosecution bearing the burden of proving a defendant’s sanity, while a majority of prosecutors believe that this is the defense counsel’s responsibility. Twenty-five percent of the prosecutors surveyed believed that it is the prosecutor’s responsibility to show by clear and convincing evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendants are sane and capable of bearing the responsibility for their crimes alleged. Philosophical and practical arguments about the burden of proof issue are examined. Preferences of defense counsels and prosecutors for different insanity tests are explored, finding that a majority of attorneys favor the more recent ALI test.