PATHWAYS TO SEX-BASED DIFFERENTIATION IN CRIMINAL COURT SENTENCING

Using a matched sampling method, this research examined the process of sex-based differentiation in sentencing outcomes for 194 men and 194 women, sentenced over a seven-year period in Christchurch, New Zealand. Consistent with past research, our results showed that judicial processing treated women more leniently than men. Path analyses revealed that judges were less likely to sentence women than men to imprisonment terms because of gendered information and decisions made earlier in the judicial process, such as criminal history, length of custodial remands, and pre-sentence recommendations by probation officers. In contrast, judges exercised considerable leniency towards women (compared with men) in setting the length of prison terms, even after statistically controlling for all sex-differentiated factors such as criminal history. Explanations and implications are discussed.     

JUVENILITY AND PUNISHMENT: SENTENCING JUVENILES IN ADULT CRIMINAL COURT*

The study outlined in this article addressed a key limitation of prior research on the punishment of juveniles transferred to adult court by employing propensity score matching techniques to create more comparable samples of juvenile and young adult offenders. Using recent data from the Maryland State Commission on Criminal Sentencing Policy, it tested competing theoretical propositions about the salience of juvenile status in adult court. Findings indicate that even after rigorous statistical matching procedures, juvenile offenders are punished more severely than their young adult counterparts. We found no evidence that this “juvenile penalty” is exacerbated by an offender's race or gender, but it does vary starkly across offense type and mode of transfer, being driven primarily by drug crimes and discretionary waivers. The import of these findings is discussed as they relate to the future of juvenile justice policy regarding the continued use of juvenile transfer to adult court.     

CRIMINAL CHARGE OR PROBATION VIOLATION? PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH IN CRIMINAL COURT PROCESSING*

Feeney et al. (1983) observe that arrests not resulting in convictions may nonetheless receive substantial punishment through reliance on alternative, less formal, means of imposing sanctions. Utilizing a sample of 1427 domestic violence cases supplemented by interviews with prosecutors, we analyze this phenomenon. We conclude that the majority of cases disposed by such means originate as new criminal charges, which are then rejected or dismissed in favor of resolution through use of the prosecutor's power to initiate probation violation hearings. In almost all instances, these cases result in a jail or prison sentence, underlining that outcomes such as “rejection” and “dismissal” are not synonymous with case termination. Failure to appreciate this distinction can lead to serious measurement error.     

THE JUVENILE PENALTY: A COMPARISON OF JUVENILE AND YOUNG ADULT SENTENCING OUTCOMES IN CRIMINAL COURT*

This study uses criminal court data from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing (PCS) to investigate the sentencing of juvenile offenders processed in adult criminal court by comparing their sentencing outcomes to those of young adult offenders in similar situations. Because the expanded juvenile exclusion and transfer policies of the 1990s have led to an increase in the number of juveniles convicted in adult courts, we argue that it is critical to better understand the judicial decision making processes involved. We introduce competitive hypotheses on the relative leniency or severity of sentencing outcomes for transferred juveniles and interpret our results with the focal concerns theoretical perspective on sentencing. Our findings indicate that juvenile offenders in adult court are sentenced more severely than their young adult counterparts. Moreover, findings suggest that juvenile status interacts with and conditions the effects of other important sentencing factors including offense type, offense severity and prior criminal record. We discuss these results as they relate to immediate outcomes for transferred juveniles, criminal court processes in general and the broader social implications for juvenile justice policy concerning the transfer of juveniles to criminal court.     

TRANSFERRED JUVENILES IN THE ERA OF SENTENCING GUIDELINES: EXAMINING JUDICIAL DEPARTURES FOR JUVENILE OFFENDERS IN ADULT CRIMINAL COURT*

This study contributes to contemporary research on the punishment of juvenile offenders in adult court by analyzing the use of guidelines departures for transferred juveniles in two states, one with presumptive sentencing guidelines (Pennsylvania) and one with voluntary guidelines (Maryland). Propensity score matching is first used to create more comparable samples of juvenile and young adult offenders, and then Tobit regressions are employed to estimate the effect of juvenile status on the likelihood and length of departures. Our findings indicate that juvenile status significantly affects the use of upward departures in Pennsylvania, and the use of both downward and upward departures in Maryland. Judicial reasons for departure are examined to provide additional insight into the complex dynamics surrounding exceptional sentences for juvenile offenders sentenced in adult court.     

DEVELOPING A UNIFIED FAMILY COURT IN ONTARIO

In Ontario, the Family Courts is a branch of the Superior Court of Justice. The author outlines the Canadian concept of a unified family court and the constitutional problems pecular to its initial establishment in Ontario in 1977, as well as its limited expansion in 1995. The courts is now on the verge of another expansion, which will be quite considerable. Also discussed is the need, in a unified family court, for a judiciary that specializes in family law cases, mediation teams and family law information centers in each court site, and most importantly, liaison and resource committees to support the work of the court.     

THEORIZING SANCTIONING IN A CRIMINALIZED JUVENILE COURT*

Recent juvenile justice reforms have produced increasingly complex and criminal‐like approaches to sanctioning youths, yet research to date has not examined the full range of newly available sentencing options nor systematically drawn on theories of adult sentencing. The present study addresses these issues by developing competing hypotheses about the effects of legal, extralegal, and processing factors, as well as sentencing options, in a highly proceduralized and criminalized juvenile court in Texas. These hypotheses are then tested using quantitative and qualitative data. The results are largely consistent with derived expectations and do not support arguments that increased proceduralization and criminalization of juvenile courts will eliminate consideration of age, gender, or race/ethnicity in sentencing decisions.     

COURT CASELOADS,PLEA BARGAINS,AND CRIMINAL SANCTIONS: THE EFFECTS OF SECTION 17 P.C. IN CALIFORNIA*

In an effort to relieve its overburdened superior courts, California introduced a statutory amendment which allowed lesser felonies to be dealt with in lower-level courts. Using an interrupted time-series methodology, this study examines the impact of this change in law on caseloads, plea bargaining, conviction rates, and sentencing in the superior courts. After the statutory intervention there was a reduction in superior court caseloads, but the overall rate of plea bargaining remained relatively constant. However, there were substantial changes in types of plea bargains with a decline in fast pleas and a corresponding rise in slow pleas. It was also found that severity of sanctions was related to the changing caseload patterns. Policy and theoretical implications of these and other findings are discussed.     

PERIODICAL PRESTIGE IN CRIMINOLOGY AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE: A Comment

This study examines the problems involved in measuring prestige of periodicah in criminology and criminal justice via subjective evaluations. An alternative measure of journal eminence based on citation frequency is developed. The differences in journal rankings derived from these contrasting methods are assessed.     

SPECIALIZATION IN VIOLENCE: EVIDENCE OF A CRIMINAL SUBGROUP*

This study examines the criminal arrest records of a Danish birth cohort of 28,884 men to test the hypothesis that specialization exists for violent offending. Property offending is included for comparison. Specialization in violence is found to exist for offenders with more than three arrests, and specialization in property offending, for offenders with fewer than four arrests. Knowledge of past violent offending is discussed as a potentially valuable part of the predictive equation of future violence.     

OPEN FAMILY MEDIATION IN THE COURT: A SYSTEMIC VIEW

It is in the nature of caring relationships that we advance to each other room as a cushion against the inevitable blows of destiny and the inevitable conflict between us.— Ivan Boszormenyi-Nagy, family therapist, 1986