The impact of the federal sentencing guidelines and reform: A comparative analysis

Justice System Journal

Volumn 30, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 34-49

  Tiede, Lydia Brashear ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 67650576072     PISSN: 0098261X     EISSN: 23277556     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/0098261X.2009.10767913     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Albonetti, C. (1997). “Sentencing Under Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Effects of Defendant Characteristics, Guilty Pleas, and Departures on Sentence Outcomes for Drug Offenses 1991-1992,” 31 Law and Society Review 789
2. Anderson, J. M., J. R. Kling, and K. Stith (1999). “Measuring Inter-judge Sentencing Disparity: Before and After the Federal Sentencing Guidelines,” 42 Journal of Law and Economics 271
3. Ashcroft, J. (2003a). Memorandum from Attorney General John Ashcroft, United States Department of Justice, to all Assistant U.S. Attorneys Regarding Departmental Guidance on Sentencing Recommendations and Appeals, July 28
4. Ashcroft, J. (2003b). Memorandum from Attorney General John Ashcroft, United States Department of Justice, to all Assistant U.S. Attorneys regarding Policy on Charging. Criminal Defendants, September 22. www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2003/September/03_ag_516.htm
5. Berman, D. (2002). “From Lawlessness to Too Much Law? Exploring the Risk of Disparity from Differences in Defense Counsel Under Guidelines Sentencing,” 87 Iowa Law Review 435
6. Bibas, S. (2005). “Federalism: Regulating Local Variations in Federal Sentencing,” 58 Stanford Law Review 137
7. Braniff, W. (1993). “Local Discretion, Prosecutorial Choices, and the Sentencing Guidelines,” 5 Federal Sentencing Reporter 309
8. Denniston, L. (2004). “Justices Agree to Consider Sentencing,” New York Times, August 3, A14
9. Everett, R., and R. Wojtkiewicz (2002). “Difference, Disparity, and Race/Ethnic Bias in Federal Sentencing,” 18 Journal of Quantitative Criminology 189
10. Frankel, M. (1972). Criminal Sentences: Law Without Order. New York: Hill and Wang
11. Free, M. (1997). “The Impact of Federal Sentencing Reforms on African Americans,” 28 Journal of Black Studies 268
12. Government Accounting Office (1992). Mandatory Minimum Sentences: Are They Being Imposed and Who Is ReceivingThem? Washington, DC: Government Accounting Office
13. Heaney, G. (1991). “The Reality of Guidelines Sentencing: No End to Disparity,” 28 American Criminal Law Review 161
14. Hofer, E J., K. R. Blackwell, and R. B. Ruback (1999). “The Effect of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines on Inter-Judge Sentencing Disparity,” 90 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 239
15. Karle, T., and T Sager (1991). “Are the Federal Sentencing Guidelines Meeting Congressional Goals?: An Empirical Case Law Analysis,” 40 Emory Law Journal 393
16. Kautt, E (2002). “Location, Location, Location: Interdistrict and Intercircuit Variation in Sentencing Outcomes for Federal Drug-Trafficking Offenses,” 19 Justice Quarterly 633
17. Kautt, E, and Spohn, C. (2002). “Cracking Down on Black Drug Offenders? Testing for Interactions Among Offenders’ Race, Drug Type, and Sentencing Strategy in Federal Drug Sentences,” 19 Justice Quarterly 1
18. Lynch, T. (2005). “One Cheer for United States v. Booker,” Cato Supreme Court Review 2004¬2005 215
19. Miller, M., and R. Wright (2002). “The Screening/Bargaining Tradeoff,” 54 Stanford Law Review 29
20. Mustard, David (2001). “Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Disparities in Sentencing: Evidence from the U.S. Federal Courts,” Journal of Law and Economics 285
21. Easko, L. (2002). “Villain or Victim: Regional Variation and Ethnic Disparity in Federal Drug Offense Sentencing,” 13 Criminal Justice Policy Review 307
22. Schanzenbach, M. (2005). “Have Federal Judges Changed their Sentencing Practices? The Shaky Empirical Foundations of the Feeney Amendment,” 2 Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 1
23. Tiede, L. (2009). “The Swinging Eendulum of Sentencing Reform: Political Actors Regulating Lower Court Discretion.” Working paper
24. Tiede, L. (2007). “Delegating Discretion: Quasi-Experiments on District Court Decision-Making,” 35 American Politics Research 595
25. Ulmer, J. (2005). “The Localized Uses of Federal Sentencing Guidelines in Four U.S. District Courts: Evidence of Erocessual Order,” 28 Symbolic Interaction 255
26. United States Sentencing Commission (2006a). Final Report on the Impact of United States v. Booker on Federal Sentencing. Washington, DC: United States Sentencing Commission
27. United States Sentencing Commission (2006b). US. Sentencing Commission Final Quarterly Report Fiscal Year 2006. Washington, DC: United States Sentencing Commission
28. United States Sentencing Commission (2005a). The United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual. Washington, DC: United States Sentencing Commission
29. United States Sentencing Commission (2004a.) Fifteen Years of Guideline Sentencing: An Assessment of How Well the Federal Criminal Justice System Is Achieving the Goals of Sentencing Reform. Washington, DC: United States Sentencing Commission
30. United States Sentencing Commission (2004b.) Memorandum of Kelly Land to Tim McGrath, Re: Office of General Counsel’s Blakely Database, November 30
31. United States Sentencing Commission (2003). Report to Congress: Downward Departures from Federal Sentencing Guidelines in Response to §401 (m) of Public Law 108-21. Washington, DC: United States Sentencing Commission
32. United States Sentencing Commission (2002). “Oversight of the U. S. Sentencing Commission: Are the Guidelines Being Followed?” Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Criminal Justice Oversight of the Senate Judiciary Committee, 106th Cong., Second Sess., 2000
33. United States Sentencing Commission (1995-2005). “Monitoring Federal Criminal Sentences” (ICPSR Nos. 3106, 3496, 3497, 4110, 4290, 4630, 4633, and 20120)[Computer File]. ICPSR Version. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-Consortium for Political and Social Science Research [Distributor]
34. United States Sentencing Commission (1996-2007). Annual Reports. Available at http://www.ussc.gov/annrpts.htm
35. United States Sentencing Commission (1991). The Federal Sentencing Guidelines: A Report on the Operation of the Guidelines System and Short-Term Impacts on Disparity in Sentencing and Use of Incarceration, and Prosecutorial Discretion and Plea Bargaining, “Executive Summary,” vols. 1-2. Washington, DC: United States Sentencing Commission
36. Waldfogel, J. (1998). “Does Inter-Judge Disparity Justify Empirically Based Sentencing Guidelines?” 18 International Review of Law and Economics 293
37. Waldfogel, J. (1991). “Aggregate Inter-Judge Disparity in Federal Sentencing: Evidence from Three Districts,” 4 Federal Sentencing Reporter 151