U.S. attorneys and substantial assistance departures: Testing for interprosecutor disparity

Criminology

Volumn 47, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 813-846

  Spohn, Cassia ^a,b   Fornango, Robert ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY WEST   (United States)

Author keywords

Departures; Federal sentencing; Prosecutors

Indexed keywords

EID: 69649098207     PISSN: 00111384     EISSN: 17459125     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-9125.2009.00163.x     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Albonetti, Celesta A. 1991. An integration of theories to explain judicial discretion. Social Problems 38 : 247 266.
2. Albonetti, Celesta A. 1997. Sentencing under the federal sentencing guidelines: Effects of defendant characteristics, guilty pleas, and departures on sentence outcomes for drug offenses, 1991-1992. Law & Society Review 31 : 789 822.
3. Albonetti, Celesta A. 2002. The joint conditioning effect of defendant's gender and ethnicity on length of imprisonment under the federal sentencing guidelines for drug trafficking/manufacturing offenders. Journal of Gender, Race, and Justice 6 : 39 60.
4. Bjerk, David 2005. Making the crime fit the penalty: The role of prosecutorial discretion under mandatory minimum sentencing. Journal of Law & Economics 48 : 591 625.
5. Brame, Robert, Raymond Paternoster, Paul Mazerolle, and Alex Piquero. 1998. Testing for the equality of maximum likelihood regression coefficients between two independent equations. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 14 : 245 261. (Pubitemid 128404485)
6. Bridges, George, and Sara Steen. 1998. Racial disparities in official assessments of juvenile offenders: Attributional stereotypes as mediating mechanisms. American Sociological Review 63 : 554 570.
7. Brown, Mary Patrice, and Steven E. Bunnell 2006. Negotiating justice: Prosecutorial perspectives on federal plea bargaining in the District of Columbia. American Criminal Law Review 43 : 1063 1093.
8. Dixon, Jo 1995. The organizational context of criminal court sentencing. American Journal of Sociology 100 : 1157 1198.
9. Eisenstein, James Roy B. Flemming, and Peter F. Nardulli 1988. The Contours of Justice: Communities and Their Courts. Boston, MA : Little, Brown, and Co.
10. Engen, Rodney L., and Randy R. Gainey 2000. Modeling the effects of legally relevant and extralegal factors under sentencing guidelines: The rules have changed. Criminology 38 : 1207 1230.
11. Everett, Ronald S., and Roger A. Wojtkiewicz 2002. Difference, disparity, and race/ethnic bias in federal sentencing. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 18 : 189 211.
12. Frankel, Marvin 1972. Lawlessness in sentencing. University of Cincinnati Law Review 41 : 1 54.
13. Hartley, Richard, Sean Madden, and Cassia Spohn. 2007. Prosecutorial discretion: An examination of substantial assistance departures in federal crack-cocaine and powder-cocaine cases. Justice Quarterly 24 : 382 407.
14. Hawkins, Darnell F. 1981. Causal attribution and punishment for crime. Deviant Behavior 1 : 191 215.
15. Heydebrand, Wolf, and Carroll Seron. 1990. Rationalizing Justice: The Political Economy of Federal District Courts. Albany : State University of New York Press.
16. Johnson, Brian D. 2006. The multilevel context of criminal sentencing: Integrating judge- and county-level influences. Criminology 44 : 259 298.
17. Johnson, Brian E., Jeffery T. Ulmer, and John H. Kramer 2008. The social context of guidelines circumvention: The case of federal district courts. Criminology 46 : 737 783.
18. Kempf-Leonard, Kimberly, and Lisa L. Sample 2001. Have the federal sentencing guidelines reduced severity? An examination of one circuit. Journal of Quantitative Criminology 17 : 111 144.
19. Kramer, John H., and Jeffery T. Ulmer 1996. Sentencing disparity and departures from guidelines. Justice Quarterly 13 : 81 106.
20. LaCasse, Chantale, and A. Abigail Payne 1999. Federal sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimum sentences: Do defendants bargain in the shadow of the judge? Journal of Law & Economics 42 : 245 269.
21. LaFrenz, Chandra, and Cassia Spohn. 2006. Who is punished more harshly? An examination of race/ethnicity, gender, age and employment status under the federal sentencing guidelines. Justice Research and Policy 8 : 25 56.
22. Maxfield, Linda Drazga, and John Kramer. 1998. Substantial Assistance: An Empirical Yardstick Gauging Equity in Current Federal Policy and Practice. Washington, DC : United States Sentencing Commission.
23. Mustard, David 2001. Racial, ethnic and gender disparities in sentencing: Evidence from the U.S. federal courts. Journal of Law & Economics 44 : 285 314.
24. Nagel, Ilene H., and Stephen J. Schulhofer 1992. A tale of three cities: An empirical study of charging and bargaining practices under the federal sentencing guidelines. Southern California Law Review 66 : 501 566.
25. O'Hara, Samantha 2006. Making a Federal Case Out of It: Prosecutorial Discretion and the United States Sentencing Guidelines in a Multi-District Study. Unpublished dissertation. University of Nebraska at Omaha.
26. Paternoster, Raymond, Robert Brame, Paul Mazerolle, and Alex Piquero. 1998. Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology 36 : 859 866.
27. Raudenbush, Stephen W., and Anthony S. Bryk 2002. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Second edition. Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.
28. Raudenbush, Stephen W., Anthony S. Bryk, and Richard Congdon. 2007. HLM for Windows. V6.04. Lincolnwood, IL : Scientific Software International.
29. Savelsberg, Joachim 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.
30. Spohn, Cassia 2005. Sentencing decisions in three U.S. district courts: Testing the assumption of uniformity in the federal sentencing process. Justice Research and Policy 7 : 1 27.
31. Stacey, Ann M., and Cassia Spohn. 2006. Gender and the social costs of sentencing: An analysis of sentences imposed on male and female offenders in three U.S. district courts. Berkeley Journal of Criminal Law 11 : 43 76.
32. Steffensmeier, Darrell, and Stephen Demuth. 2000. Ethnicity and sentencing outcomes in U.S. federal courts: Who is punished more harshly? American Sociological Review 65 : 705 729.
33. Steffensmeier, Darrell, Jeffery Ulmer, and John Kramer. 1998. The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, black, and male. Criminology 36 : 763 798. (Pubitemid 128156126)
34. Stith, Kate, and Jose A. Cabranes 1998. Fear of Judging: Sentencing Guidelines in the Federal Courts. Chicago, IL : University of Chicago Press.
35. Tonry, Michael H. 1996. Sentencing Matters. New York : Oxford University Press.
36. Ulmer, Jeffery T. 1997. Social Worlds of Sentencing: Court Communities Under Sentencing Guidelines. Albany : State University of New York Press.
37. Ulmer, Jeffery T. 2005. The localized uses of federal sentencing guidelines in four U.S. district courts: Evidence of processual order. Symbolic Interaction 28 : 255 279.
38. Ulmer, Jeffery T., and John H. Kramer 1998. The use and transformation of formal decision making criteria: Sentencing guidelines, organizational context, and case processing strategies. Social Problems 45 : 248 267.
39. U.S. General Accounting Office. 2003. Federal Drug Offenses: Departures from Sentencing Guidelines and Mandatory Minimums, Fiscal Years 1999-2001. Washington, DC : U.S. General Accounting Office.
40. U.S. Sentencing Commission. 2001. Federal Sentencing Guidelines Manual. St. Paul, MN : West Publishing Co.
41. U.S. Sentencing Commission. 2003. Sourcebook of Federal Sentencing Statistics. Washington, DC : United States Sentencing Commission.
42. U.S. Sentencing Commission. 2004. Fifteen Years of Guidelines Sentencing: An Assessment of How Well the Federal Criminal Justice System Is Achieving the Goals of Sentencing Reform. Washington, DC : United States Sentencing Commission.