CONTEXTUAL DISPARITIES IN GUIDELINES DEPARTURES: COURTROOM SOCIAL CONTEXTS,GUIDELINES COMPLIANCE,AND EXTRALEGAL DISPARITIES IN CRIMINAL SENTENCING1

This study examines the theoretical and empirical linkages between criminal court social contexts and the judicial use of sentences that deviate from the recommendations of sentencing guidelines. Individual sentencing data from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing (PCS) are combined with county‐level measures of social context to examine predictions about the role courtroom characteristics play in judicial departures. Results from hierarchical analyses suggest that the likelihood of departure varies significantly across courts, even after accounting for variations in individual case characteristics. Several measures of courtroom social context—including the size of the court, its caseload pressure and the overall guidelines compliance rate—are significantly related to the individual likelihood of receiving a departure sentence. Moreover, the social context of the court also conditions the influence of various individual‐level sentencing considerations. Findings are discussed in relation to contemporary theoretical perspectives on courtroom decision making and future directions for research on contextual disparities in criminal sentencing are suggested.     

RACE,ETHNICITY, THREAT AND THE LABELING OF CONVICTED FELONS*

Florida law allows judges to withhold adjudication of guilt for persons who have either pled guilty or been found guilty of a felony. This provision may apply only to persons who will be sentenced to probation, and it allows such individuals to retain all civil rights and to truthfully assert they had not been convicted of a felony. This paper examines the effects of race and Hispanic ethnicity on the withholding of adjudication for 91,477 males sentenced to probation in Florida between 1999 and 2002. Hierarchical Generalized Linear Modeling is used to assess the direct effects of defendant attributes as well as the cross‐level interactions between race, ethnicity and community level indicators of threat, such as percentage black and Hispanic and concentrated disadvantage. Our results show that Hispanics and blacks are significantly less likely to have adjudication withheld when other individual and community level factors are controlled. This effect is especially pronounced for blacks and for drug offenders. Cross‐level interactions show that concentrated disadvantage has a substantial effect on the adjudication withheld outcome for both black and Hispanic defendants. The implications of these results for the conceptualization of racial/ethnic threat at the individual, situational and social levels are discussed.     

DISCRETION AND DISPARITY UNDER SENTENCING GUIDELINES: THE ROLE OF DEPARTURES AND STRUCTURED SENTENCING ALTERNATIVES*

This article examines the use of alternative sentencing provisions as mechanisms for departing from sentencing guidelines in Washington State and as structural sources of unwarranted sentencing disparity. The authors argue that these structural features of guidelines not only serve as “windows of discretion” through which disparities arise, but they also may encourage disparities by requiring consideration of substantive criteria that disadvantage certain offender groups. The analyses find that males and minority offenders are less likely to receive alternative sentences below the standard range, but that race‐ethnicity and gender have inconsistent effects on departures above the standard range. Theoretical implications of the study are discussed.     

SENTENCING IN CONTEXT: A MULTILEVEL ANALYSIS

Criminal sentencing is, along with arresting and prosecuting, among the most important of formal social control decisions. In this study we use hierarchical modeling to test hypotheses about contextual level influences and cross level interaction effects on local court decisions. Most of the explanatory "action," our analysis shows, is at the individual case level in criminal sentencing. We also find evidence that local contextual features–such as court organizational culture, court caseload pressure, and racial and ethnic composition–affect sentencing outcomes, either directly or in interaction with individual factors. We conclude by discussing theoretical implications of our findings, and how our study points out some dilemmas among civil rights, local autonomy and organizational realities of criminal courts.     

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.     

量刑规范与量刑建议考评机制反思

量刑规范化一直是理论与司法实务关注的焦点。随着法院量刑规范化与检察机关量刑建议的逐渐推行,实务界出现了忽视理论上量刑难度之维,认为采用简单的考评机制,法官和检察官就能实现量刑正义的错误倾向。量刑规范化、量刑建议是实现量刑正义的手段而非实现能力考核的手段。     

酌定量刑情节法定化研究

酌定量刑情节是指法官在量刑时应当考虑并且能反映行为人人身危险性及其社会危害性的主客观事实。酌定量刑情节非法定性不仅违背了刑法基本原则,更导致法官滥用自由裁量权等问题。基于罪刑法定原则的要求和酌定量刑情节对量刑的普遍性意义,有必要对刑法第62条和第63条进行相应修改。     

论量刑偏差及规制

量刑偏差现象在世界各国普遍存在,在我国也是使刑事司法深受困扰的难题,量刑偏差严重损害了法律的尊严和司法机关的威信,危害极大。导致量刑偏差有多种原因,必须有针对性在采取措施,预防、避免量刑偏差。     

量刑情节冲突问题研究

量刑情节冲突是司法实践中一个颇为棘手的问题,其具有多种具体表现形式,对于量刑情节不应当仅仅一次性笼统的看,而应该视不同情况分层次进行全面考量。对此问题,许多国家都有可供借鉴的成熟做法,然各国规定多不一致。我国学者对此也有研究,但鲜有深入阐述者。建立情节冲突适用规则的层次化体系,可从一般原则和具体适用规则两个方面的操作。     

论我国量刑建议制度的构建

量刑建议权对于充实公诉权的内容、制约法官裁量权、完善诉讼构造有着重要意义。我国的改革实践显示出建立量刑建议制度的必要性。目前的主要任务是完善各个环节的设计,科学地构建具体的量刑建议制度。