Is it a prosecutor's world?: Determinants of count bargaining decisions

Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice

Volumn 22, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 241-260

  Ball, Jeremy D ^a  

^a BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Consensus and conflict; Focal concerns theory; Liberation hypothesis; Plea bargaining; Prosecutorial discretion

Indexed keywords

EID: 33748422469     PISSN: 10439862     EISSN: 15525406     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1043986206292369     Document Type: Article

References (49)

1. Albonetti, C. A. (1987). Prosecutorial discretion: The effects of uncertainty. Law and Society Review, 21, 291-313.
2. Albonetti, C. A. (1990). Race and the probability of pleading guilty. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 6, 315-334.
3. Albonetti, C. A. (1992). Charge reduction: An analysis of prosecutorial discretion in burglary and robbery cases. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 8, 317-333.
4. Aldrich, J., & Nelson, F. (1984). Linear probability, logit, and probit models. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
5. Bachman, R., & Paternoster, R. (2004). Statistics for criminology and criminal justice (2nd ed.) Boston: McGraw-Hill.
6. Baldus, D. C., Woodworth, G., & Pulaski, C. A. (1990). Equal justice and the death penalty: A legal and empirical analysis. Boston: Northeastern University Press.
7. Bernstein, I. N., Kick, E., Leung, J. T., & Schulz, B. (1977). Charge reduction: An intermediary stage in the process of labeling criminal defendants. Social Forces, 56, 362-384.
8. Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., Martin, S. E., & Tonry, M. H. (Eds.). (1983). Research on sentencing: The search for reform (Vols. 1-2). Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
9. Brereton, D., & Casper, J. (1981-1982). Does it pay to plead guilty? Differential sentencing and the functioning of the criminal courts. Law & Society Review, 16, 45-70.
10. Britt, C. L. (2000). Social context and racial disparities in punishment decisions. Justice Quarterly, 17, 707-732.
11. Chiricos, T. G., & Bales, W. D. (1991). Unemployment and punishment: An empirical assessment. Criminology, 29, 701-723.
12. Eisenstein, J., Flemming, R. B., & Nardulli, P. F. (1988). The contours of justice: Communities and their courts. Boston: Little, Brown.
13. Farnworth, M., & Teske, R. H. C. (1995). Gender differences in felony court processing: Three hypotheses of disparity. Women & Crime Justice, 6 (2). 23-44.
14. Figueira-McDonough, J. (1985). Gender differences in informal processing: A look at charge bargaining and sentence reduction in Washington, DC. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 22 ̧ 101-133.
15. Harrison, P., & Beck, A. (2003). Prisoners in 2003. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
16. Heumann, M. (1978). Plea bargaining: The experiences of prosecutors, judges, and defense attorneys. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
17. Illinois Complied Statutes, 720 ILCS 570/401 (1996).
18. Johnson, B. D. (2003). Racial and ethnic disparities in sentencing departures across modes of conviction. Criminology, 41, 449-490.
19. Kellough, G., & Wortley, S. (2002). Remand for plea: Bail decisions and plea bargaining as commensurate decisions. British Journal of Criminology, 42, 186-210.
20. Kalven, H., & Zeisel, H. (1966). The American jury. Boston: Little, Brown.
21. Kersetter, W. (1990). Gateway to justice: Police and prosecutorial response to sexual assaults against women. Criminology, 81, 267-313.
22. LaFree, G. D. (1980). Variables affecting guilty pleas and convictions in rape cases: Toward a social theory of rape processing. Social Forces, 58, 833-850.
23. LaFree, G. D. (1985). Adversarial and nonadversarial justice: A comparison of guilty pleas and trials. Criminology, 23, 289-312.
24. McDonald, W. F. (1985). Plea bargaining: Critical issues and commonpractices. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
25. Menard, S. (2002). Applied logistic regression analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26. Meyer, J. A., & Gray, T. (1997). Drunk drivers in the courts: Legal and extra-legal factors affecting pleas and sentences. Journal of Criminal Justice, 25, 155-163.
27. Miethe, T. D., & Moore, C. A. (1986). Racial differences in criminal processing: The consequences of model selection on conclusions about differential treatment. Sociological Quarterly, 27, 217-237.
28. Nardulli,P., Eisenstein,J., & Flemming,R.B. (1988). Thetenorofjustice. Urbana: UniversityofIllinoisPress.
29. Schulhofer, S. J., & Nagel, I. H. (1997). Plea negotiations under the federal sentencing guidelines: Guideline circumvention and its dynamics in the post-Mistretta period. Northwestern University Law Review, 91, 1284-1316.
30. Sorensen, J., & Wallace, D. H. (1999). Prosecutorial discretion in seeking death: An analysis of racial disparity in this pretrial stages of case processing in a midwestern county. Justice Quarterly, 16, 559-578.
31. Spohn, C. (2002). How do judges decide? The quest for fairness and justice in sentencing. Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.
32. Spohn, C., & Beichner, D. (2000). Is preferential treatment of female offenders a thing of the past? A multi-site study of gender, race, and imprisonment. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 11, 149-184.
33. Spohn, C., Beichner, D., & Davis-Frenzel, E. (2001). Prosecutorial justifications for sexual assault case rejection: Guarding the "gateway to justice." Social Problems, 48, 206-235.
34. Spohn, C., & Cederblom, J. (1991). Race and disparities in sentencing: A test of the liberation hypothesis. Justice Quarterly, 8, 305-327.
35. Spohn, C., & Holleran, D. (2000). The imprisonment penalty paid by young, unemployed Black and Hispanic male offenders. Criminology, 38, 281-306.
36. Spohn, C., & Holleran, D. (2001). Prosecuting sexual assault: A comparison of charging decisions in sexual assault cases involving strangers, acquaintances, and intimate partners. Justice Quarterly, 18, 651-688.
37. Steffensmeier, D., & Demuth, S. (2000). Ethnicity and sentencing outcomes in U.S. federal courts: Who is punished more harshly? American Sociological Review, 65, 705-729.
38. Steffensmeier, D., Ulmer, J., & Kramer, J. (1998). The interaction of race, gender, and age, in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, Black, and male. Criminology, 36, 763-797.
39. Studenmund, A. H. (1997). Using econometrics: A practical guide (3rd ed.) Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
40. Sudnow, D. (1965). Normal crime. Social Problems, 12, 254-264.
41. Thomas, C. W., & Fitch, W. A. (1976). Prosecutorial decision making. American Criminal Law Review, 13, 507-559.
42. Ulmer, J. T. (1997). Social worlds of sentencing: Court communities under sentencing guidelines. Albany: State University of New York Press.
43. Ulmer, J. T., & Kramer, J. H. (1996). Court communities under sentencing guidelines: Dilemmas of formal rationality and sentencing disparity. Criminology, 34, 383-407.
44. Voit, E. S. (1987). Formal, substantive, and ascriptive determinants of prosecutorial decisions and their effects on case outcomes in the criminal justice process. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University.
45. Walker, S. (1998). Sense and nonsense about crime and drugs: A policy guide (4th ed.) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
46. Walker, S., Spohn, C., & DeLone, M. (2000). The color of justice: Race ethnicity and crime in America (2nd ed.) Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
47. Wilmot, K. A., & Spohn, C. (2004). Prosecutorial discretion and real-offense sentencing: An analysis of relevant conduct under the federal sentencing guidelines. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 15, 324-343.
48. Wooldredge, J., & Griffin, T. (2005). Displaced discretion under Ohio sentencing guidelines. Journal of Criminal Justice, 33, 301-316.
49. Wooldredge, J., & Thistlethwaite, A. (2004). Bilevel disparities in court dispositions for intimate assault. Criminology, 42, 417-456.