Changes in federal sentencing for forced labor trafficking and for sex trafficking: A ten year assessment

Crime, Law and Social Change

Volumn 61, Issue 2, 2014, Pages 179-204

  Albonetti, Celesta A ^a  

^a University of Iowa   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84897026517     PISSN: 09254994     EISSN: 15730751     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10611-013-9507-1     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Albonetti, C. (1997). Sentencing under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines: effects of defendant characteristics, guilty pleas, and departures on sentence outcomes for drug offenses, 1991-1992. Law and Society Review, 31(4), 789-822.
2. Albonetti, C., & Baller, R. (2010). Sentencing in federal drug trafficking/manufacturing cases: a multilevel analysis of extra-legal defendant characteristics, guidelines departures, and continuity of culture. Journal of Gender, Race and Justice, 41(1), 41-71.
3. Albonetti, C. (2002). The effects of the "Safety Valve" amendment on length of imprisonment for cocaine trafficking/manufacturing offenders: mitigating the effects of mandatory minimum penalties and offender's ethnicity. Iowa Law Review, 87(2), 401-433.
4. Albonetti, C. (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. The Journal of Gender, Race and Justice, 6(1), 39-60.
5. Albonetti, C. (1998). The role of gender and departures in the sentencing of defendants convicted of a white-collar offense under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Crime, Law, and Deviance, 1, 3-48.
6. Day, K. (2012). Addressing the sex trafficking crisis: how prostitution laws can help. Creighton International and Comparative Journal, 2, 149-172.
7. Gyutvi, J. (1994). Prosecutorial discretion to bring a substantial assistance motion pursuant to a plea agreement: enforcing a good faith standard. Minnesota Law Review, 78, 1253-1283.
8. Johnson, B., & Ulmer, J. (2008). The social context of guidelines circumvention: the case of federal district courts. Criminology, 46(3), 737-783.
9. Mattar, M. (2011). Interpreting judicial interpretations of the criminal statutes of the trafficking victims protection act: ten years later. American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy and the Law, 19, 1248-1304.
10. Mustard, D. (2001). Racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in sentencing: evidence from the U. S. Federal Courts. Journal of Law and Economics, 44(1), 285-314.
11. Nel, S. (2005). Victims of human trafficking: are they adequately protected in the United States? Journal of International and Comparative Law, 5, 1-32.
12. Standen, J. (1993). Plea bargaining in the shadow of the guidelines. California Law Review, 81, 1471-1538.
13. Ulmer, J., Light, M., & Kramer, J. (2011). Does increased judicial discretion lead to increased disparity? The "liberation" of judicial sentencing discretion in the wake of Booker/Fanfan decision. Justice Quarterly, 28(6), 799-837.
14. Wilkins, W., Jr., & Steer, J. (1990). Relevant conduct: the cornerstone of the federal sentencing guidelines. South Carolina Law Review, 41, 495-531.
15. Cano, M., & Spohn, C. (2004). Prosecutorial discretion and real offense sentencing under the federal sentencing guidelines: an analysis of relevant conduct. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 39, 308-332.
16. Hartley, R., Maddan, S., & Spohn, C. (2007). Prosecutorial discretion: an examination of substantial assistance departures in federal crack cocaine and powder cocaine cases. Justice Quarterly, 24, 382-407.
17. Hofer, P., Blackwell, K., & Ruback, R. (1999). The effects of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines on inter-judge sentencing disparity. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 90(1), 239-322.
18. Lee, C. (1994). Prosecutorial discretion, substantial assistance, and the federal sentencing guidelines. University of California Los Angles Law Review, 42, 105-180.
19. Scott, R. (2010). Inter-judge sentencing disparity after Booker: a first look. Stanford Law Review, 63(1), 1-66.
20. Ulmer, J., Eisenstein, J., & Johnson, B. (2010). Trial penalties in federal sentencing: extra-guidelines factors and district variation. Justice Quarterly, 27(4), 560-592.
21. Choi-Fitzpatrick, A. (2012). Rethinking trafficking: Contemporary slavery. In A. Brysk & A. Choi-Fitzpatrick (Eds.), From human trafficking to human rights (pp. 1-12). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
22. Farrell, A. (2011). Improving law enforcement identification and response to human trafficking. In J. Winterdyk, B. Perrin, & P. Reichel (Eds.), Human trafficking: Exploring the international nature, concerns and complexities (pp. 181-207). New York: Taylor and Francis.
23. Farrell, A., & McDevitt, J. (2008). Enhancing the collection and standardization of human trafficking data: Examples from data collection in the United States. In International Organization of Migration. Human trafficking: New directions for research (pp. 15-27). Geneva: International Organization of Migration.
24. Farrell, A., & Fahy, S. (2009). The problem of human trafficking in the U. S.: public frames and policy responses. Journal of Criminal Justice, 37(6), 617-627.
25. Mariconda, S. (2009). Breaking the chains: combating human trafficking at the state level. Boston College Third World Law Journal, 29, 151-187.
26. Yoder, H. (2008-2009). Civil rights for victims of human trafficking. University of Pennsylvania Journal of Law and Social Change, 12, 133-168.
27. United States Sentencing Guidelines Manual. (2003).
28. Nagel, I., & Johnson, B. (1994). The role of gender in a structured sentencing system: equal treatment policy choices, and the sentencing of female offenders under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 85(1), 181-221.
29. Everett, R., & Wojtkiewicz, R. (2002). Difference, disparity, and race/ethnicity bias in federal sentencing. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 18(2), 189-211.
30. Steffensmeier, D., & Demuth, S. (2000). Ethnicity and sentencing outcomes in U. S. Federal Courts: who is punished more harshly? American Sociological Review, 65(3), 705-729.
31. Kautt, P., & Delone, M. (2006). Sentencing outcomes under competing but coexisting sentencing interventions: untying the Gordian Knot. Criminal Justice Review, 31(2), 105-131.