The inextricable link between age and criminal history in sentencing

Crime and Delinquency

Volumn 53, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 156-183

  Bushway, Shawn D ^a   Piehl, Anne Morrison ^b  

^a STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Age discrimination; Criminal history; Sentencing

Indexed keywords

EID: 33845382707     PISSN: 00111287     EISSN: 1552387X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0011128706294444     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Albonetti, C. A. (1991). An integration of theories to explain judicial discretion. Social Problems, 38, 247-266.
2. Auerhahn, K. (1999). Selective incapacitation and the problem of prediction. Criminology, 37, 703-734.
3. Barnett, A., Blumstein, A., & Farrington, D. (1987). Probabilistic models of youthful criminal careers. Criminology, 25, 83-107.
4. Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., & Hsieh, P. (1982). The duration of adult criminal careers. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
5. Blumstein, A., Cohen, J., Roth, J., & Visher, C. A. (Eds.). (1986). Criminal careers and career criminals. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
6. Bushway, S. D., & Piehl, A. M. (2001). Judging judicial discretion: Legal factors and racial discrimination in sentencing. Law & Society Review, 35, 733-764.
7. Chaiken, J. M., & Chaiken, M. R. (1982). Varieties of criminal behavior. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
8. Engen, R. L., & Gainey, R. R. (2000). Modeling the effects of legally relevant and extralegal factors under sentencing guidelines: The rules have changed. Criminology, 38, 1207-1229.
9. Farrington, D. P. (1985). Predicting self-reported and official delinquency. In D. P. Farrington & R. Tarling (Eds.), Prediction in criminology (pp. 150-173). Albany: State University of New York Press.
10. Fletcher, G. P. (1978). Rethinking criminal law. Boston: Little, Brown.
11. Gottfredson, S. D. (1987). Prediction: An overview of selected methodological issues. In D. M. Gottfredson & M. Tonry (Eds.), Crime and justice: An annual review of research (Vol. 9, pp. 21-52). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Gottfredson, S. D., & Gottfredson, D. M. (1986). Accuracy of prediction models. In A. Blumstein, J. Cohen, J. Roth, & C. Visher (Eds.), Criminal careers and career criminals (pp. 212-290). Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
13. Gottfredson, S. D., & Gottfredson, D. M. (1994). Behavioral prediction and the problem of incapacitation. Criminology, 32, 441-474.
14. Gottfredson, M. R., & Hirschi, T. (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
15. Greenwood, P. W. (1982). Selective incapacitation. Santa Monica, CA: RAND.
16. Kurlychek, M., & Johnson, B. (2004). The juvenile penalty: A comparison of juvenile and young adult sentencing outcomes in a criminal court. Criminology, 42, 485-517.
17. Langan, P. A., & Levin, D. J. (2002). Recidivism of prisoners released in 1994. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
18. Laub, J. H., & Sampson, R. J. (2001). Understanding desistance from crime. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 28, pp. 1-69). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
19. Nagin, D. S. (2005). Group-based modeling of development over the life course. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
20. Nagin, D. S., & Land, K. C. (1993). Age, criminal careers, and population heterogeneity - Specification and estimation of a nonparametric, mixed poisson model. Criminology, 31, 327-362.
21. Osgood, D. W. (2000). Poisson-based regression analysis of aggregate crime rates. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 16 (1). 21-43.
22. Osgood, D. W., & Rowe, D. C. (1994). Bridging criminal careers, theory, and policy through latent variable models of individual offending. Criminology, 32, 517-554.
23. Piquero, A. R., Farrington, D. P., & Blumstein, A. (2003). The criminal career paradigm: Background and recent developments. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 30, pp. 137-283). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
24. Raudenbush, S. (2001). Comparing personal trajectories and drawing causal inferences from longitudinal data. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 501-525.
25. Savelsberg, J. J. (1992). Law that does not fit society - Sentencing guidelines as a neoclassical reaction to the dilemmas of substantivized law. American Journal of Sociology, 97, 1346-1381.
26. Schauer, F. (2003). Profiles, probabilities, and stereotypes. Cambridge, MA: Belknap.
27. Silver, E., & Chow-Martin, L. (2002). A multiple models approach to assessing recidivism risk: Implications for judicial decision making. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 29, 538-568.
28. Singer, R. (1979). Just deserts: Sentencing based on equality and desert. Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
29. Spohn, C. (2000). Thirty years of sentencing reform: The quest for a racially neutral sentencing process. In Policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system (pp. 427-501). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
30. Spohn, C., & Holleran, D. (2000). The imprisonment penalty paid by young, unemployed Black and Hispanic male offenders. Criminology, 38, 281-306.
31. Steffensmeier, D., & Demuth, S. (2000). Ethnicity and sentencing outcomes in US federal courts: Who is punished more harshly? American Sociological Review, 65, 705-729.
32. Steffensmeier, D., Kramer, J., & Ulmer, J. (1995). Age differences in sentencing. Justice Quarterly, 12, 583-602.
33. 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.
34. Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (1996). Maturity of judgment in adolescence: Pyschosocial factors in adolescent decision making. Law and Human Behavior, 20, 249-272.
35. Steinberg, L., & Cauffman, E. (2001). Adolescents as adults in court: A developmental perspective on the transfer of juveniles to criminal court. Social Policy Report, 15, 3-14.
36. Steinberg, L., & Scott, E. (2003). Less guilty by reason of adolescence: Developmental immaturity, diminished responsibility and the juvenile death penalty. American Psychologist, 58, 1009-1018.
37. Strom, K. J. S. (2000). Profile of state prisoners under age 18, 1985-97. Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics.
38. Tonry, M. (1993). Sentencing commissions and their guidelines. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 17, pp. 137-195). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
39. Tonry, M. (1999). Rethinking unthinkable punishment policies in America. UCLA Law Review, 46, 1781-1791.
40. Ulmer, J., & Johnson, B. D. (2004). Sentencing in context: A multilevel analysis. Criminology, 42 (1). 137-177.
41. Ulmer, J. T. (2000). The rules have changed - So proceed with caution: A comment on Engen and Gainey's method for modeling sentencing outcomes under guidelines. Criminology, 38, 1231-1243.
42. Ulmer, J. T., & Kramer, J. H. (1996). Court communities under sentencing guidelines: Dilemmas of formal rationality and sentencing disparity. Criminology, 34, 383-408.
43. von Hirsch, A. (1983). Criminology: Commensurability and crime prevention: Evaluating formal sentencing structures and their rationale. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 1983, 209-209.
44. von Hirsch, A. (1985). Past or future crimes: Deservedness and dangerousness in the sentencing of criminals. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
45. Wasik, M. (1987). Guidance, guidelines, and criminal record sentencing reform: Guidance or guidelines? In M. Wasik & K. Pease (Eds.), Sentencing reform: Guidance or guidelines? (pp. 105-115). Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.