Cassia Spohn

Is Preferential Treatment of Female Offenders a Thing of the Past? A Multisite Study of Gender, Race, and Imprisonment

Dramatic increases in the number of women incarcerated in state and federal prisons have led some researchers to conclude that differential sentencing of female offenders is a thing of the past. This study uses data on offenders convicted of felonies in Chicago, Miami, and Kansas City to address this issue. The authors find no evidence to support this “gender neutrality” hypothesis. In all three jurisdictions, women face significantly lower odds of incarceration than do men. The results also reveal that the effect of race is conditioned by gender but the effect of gender, with only one exception, is not conditioned by race; harsher treatment of racial minorities is confined to men but more lenient treatment of women is found for both racial minorities and Whites.

THE EFFECT OF RACE ON SENTENCING: A RE-EXAMINATION OF AN UNSE"TT'LED QUESTION

Although the possible effect of race on sentencing decisions is a much-studied question, even recent studies suffer from methodological problems. This paper attempts to correct these problems by using a large number of cases and a large number of offenses, by dividing the sentencing decision into two separate decisions, by using an appropriate scale to measure sentence severity, by including controls for relevant legal and extra-legal factors, and by using multivariate analysis. Our major findings are that race does not have a direct effect on sentence severity, but that blacks are more likely than whites to be incarcerated.

Race and disparities in sentencing: A test of the liberation hypothesis

This paper builds on Kalven and Zeisels “liberation hypothesis” and explores the possibility that racial discrimination in sentencing is confined to less serious cases. We examined the sentences imposed on defendants convicted of violent felonies in Detroit. We found that defendants race had a direct effect only on the decision to incarcerate but had indirect effects on both incarceration and sentence length. Further analysis revealed an interaction between the race of the defendant, the seriousness of the case, and the harshness of the sentence. Using a number of measures of the seriousness of the case, we found that race had a significant effect on incarceration only in less serious cases. Our findings provide dramatic support for the liberation hypothesis and highlight the importance of using an interactive rather than an additive model in sentencing research.

The Sentencing Decisions of Black and White Judges: Expected and Unexpected Similarities

Those who champion the representation of blacks on the bench argue that black judges may make a difference. Indeed, some suggest that increasing the proportion of black judges might result in more equitable treatment of black and white defendants. In this study we test these expectations. Using data on defendants charged with violent felonies, we compare the sentencing decisions of black and white judges in Detroit. We find remarkable similarities and conclude that judicial race has relatively little predictive power. More important, we find that both black and white judge sentence black offenders more severely than white offenders. Our results raise questions about the appropriate interpretation of racial disparity in incarceration rates and suggest that the harsher treatment of black offenders cannot be attributed to the racism of white judges.

The effect of offender and victim characteristics on sexual assault case processing decisions

Previous research testing the sexual stratification hypothesis has demonstrated that the defendants race interacts with the victims race to produce harsher sentences for blacks who sexually assault whites. Research also has demonstrated that victim characteristics affect outcomes of sexual assault cases. We use data on defendants bound over for trial in Detroit Recorders Court to build on and extend this research. We examine the effect of the racial makeup of the offender/victim pair on a series of sexual assault case outcomes, and we test for interaction between offender/victim race, the relationship between the victim and the offender, and evidence of risk-taking behavior by the victim. Our results show that sexual assaults involving black men and white women are not always treated more harshly than other types of assaults. We conclude that the sexual stratification hypothesis must be modified to account for the role of factors other than the racial composition of the offender/victim pair.

CUMULATIVE DISADVANTAGE: EXAMINING RACIAL AND ETHNIC DISPARITY IN PROSECUTION AND SENTENCING

Current research on criminal case processing typically examines a single decision-making point, so drawing reliable conclusions about the impact that factors such as defendants’ race or ethnicity exert across successive stages of the justice system is difficult. Using data from the New York County District Attorneys Office that tracks 185,275 diverse criminal cases, this study assesses racial and ethnic disparity for multiple discretionary points of prosecution and sentencing. Findings from multivariate logistic regression analyses demonstrate that the effects of race and ethnicity vary by discretionary point and offense category. Black and Latino defendants were more likely than White defendants to be detained, to receive a custodial plea offer, and to be incarcerated—and they received especially punitive outcomes for person offenses—but were more likely to benefit from case dismissals. The findings for Asian defendants were less consistent but suggest they were the least likely to be detained, to receive custodial offers, and to be incarcerated. These findings are discussed in the context of contemporary theoretical perspectives on racial bias and cumulative disadvantage in the justice system.

Crack-ing down on black drug offenders? Testing for interactions among offenders' race, drug type, and sentencing strategy in federal drug sentences

The interaction between a defendants race and type of drug has long been argued to affect sentencing for drug offenses. Many assert that blacks receive harsher sentences than do whites merely because of harsher penalties associated with specific drugs. This argument is particularly strong in federal sentencing, where large differences exist in the specified sanctions for the various types of drugs. We analyze the relationship among a defendants race, sentencing strategy, and drug type net of other theoretically relevant factors. Our findings question previous assumptions regarding this relationship, suggesting that a defendants race “conditions” the effects of drug and other factors differently from one sentencing strategy to the next.

Prosecutorial Discretion: An Examination of Substantial Assistance Departures in Federal Crack‐Cocaine and Powder‐Cocaine Cases

Recently there has been a call for research that explores decision‐making at stages prior to sentencing in the criminal justice process. Particularly research is needed under a determinate sentencing system where judicial dispositions are usually restricted by guidelines, which increases the importance of earlier decision‐making stages. As an answer to this call, and in an attempt to build on currents studies on the effects of departures as an intervening mechanism, and a source of unwarranted disparity, this study explores federal sentencing data on offenders convicted of crack‐cocaine and powder‐cocaine offenses. Although decision‐making of all criminal justice actors generally, and prosecutors specifically, has been the subject of much research, studies have yet to resolve the nature and outcome of their “autonomous” discretion. This autonomy becomes especially salient regarding prosecutorial decisions for substantial assistance departures. In deciding who receives a substantial assistance departure, the prosecutor has carte blanche power.

Drug courts and recidivism: The results of an evaluation using two comparison groups and multiple indicators of recidivism

Increases in the number of drug offenders appearing in state and federal courts, coupled with mounting evidence of both the linkages between drug use and crime and the efficacy of drug treatment programs, led many jurisdictions to implement drug treatment courts. Although these courts vary on a number of dimensions, most are designed to reduce drug use and criminal behavior among drug-involved offenders. This study evaluates the effectiveness of one drug court–the Douglas County (Omaha), Nebraska Drug Court–in reducing offender recidivism. We use a variety of analytical techniques to compare drug court participants and offenders in two matched comparison groups on a number of measures of recidivism. Our results reveal that drug court participants have substantially lower rates of recidivism than traditionally adjudicated felony drug offenders, and that the differences in recidivism rates between drug court participants and drug offenders who participated in a diversion program prior to the implementation of the drug court disappeared once we controlled for the offenders assessed level of risk, as indicated by his/her LSI score.

The Criminal Justice System’s Response to Sexual Violence

The legal reforms of the 1960s and 1970s notwithstanding, sexual assault is a crime characterized by underreporting and case attrition. In this article, the authors synthesize research examining the criminal justice system’s response to sexual assault. The authors begin by examining research on the victim’s decision to report the crime to the police. This is followed by a discussion of the findings of sexual assault case processing research, with a focus on the criminal justice system’s response to aggravated and simple rape and to intimate partner sexual violence. The authors end the article with a discussion of questions that research has yet to adequately answer.