Search

Table of Contents Introduction I. An Overview of Federal Habeas Corpus II. Historical and Scholarly Perspectives A. Historical and Circumstantial Evidence B. The Existing Academic Research III. Testing Whether Death [...], Legal commentators have long believed that federal judges treat capital appeals more favorably than noncapital appeals. However, due to the bifurcated nature of capital trials and the complexity of the ensuing appeals, no empirical research to date has proven that the guilt-phase claims of capital defendants are more likely to succeed on federal habeas review than the claims of other defendants. This Note addresses that gap in the literature. The Author analyzed 1,368 votes cast by federal appellate judges between 2013 and 2017 in murder cases heard on habeas review. In each of those cases, the defendant was under a sentence of either death or life in prison. Exploiting this unique dataset, this Note finds that federal appellate judges are significantly more likely to grant guilt-phase relief to capital defendants than they are to similarly situated noncapital defendants. It then rules out alternative explanations for this finding of a "sentencing effect," such as differential attorney investment or dissimilarity between capital and noncapital defendants. After establishing that federal appellate judges do in fact behave differently in capital cases, the Note considers the normative implications of this finding. It ultimately concludes that the behavior of federal judges on habeas review is consistent with a generally shared principle of capital jurisprudence: preventing the execution of innocents.

B. Departures Become More Frequent as Loss Amount Increases, Largely Due to Changes in the Rate of Government-Sponsored. Departures This Section considers whether the loss amount attributed to the defendant [...]

NOTE CONTENTS INTRODUCTION I. FROM JUDICIAL DISCRETION TO MANDATORY GUIDELINES AND BACK AGAIN: A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES A. The Advent of the Sentencing Guidelines and the Mandatory [...], Between 1987 and 2005, federal judges sentenced defendants pursuant to binding Sentencing Guidelines that severely curtailed their discretion. In United States v. Booker, the Supreme Court held the mandatory Guidelines sentencing scheme unconstitutional and rendered the Guidelines advisory. This Note offers a picture of white-collar sentencing in 'shades of gray.' It conducts an empirical analysis of sentencing decisions after Booker to assess the consequences of the return to judicial discretion. In particular, the Note examines major white-collar cases in the Southern District of New York, where many such cases of national and international significance are prosecuted. The Guidelines instruct judges in white-collar cases to calculate the amount of economic loss attributable to the defendant and apply a sentencing enhancement-often a sizable one-on the basis of that loss. The findings reveal that a significant majority of defendants in these cases receive sentences of imprisonment shorter than those recommended by the Guidelines. Moreover, when judges impose sentences below the Guidelines range, the resulting sentences are often dramatically shorter than those produced under the Guidelines. Based on these findings, this Note argues that the U.S. Sentencing Commission should revise its approach to white-collar cases in three ways. The Commission should amend the Guidelines to reduce the severity of the economic loss table; calculate economic 'loss' differently; and add additional, though less severe, enhancements to punish pecuniary gain and intended loss. Absent such changes, judges will--and should--continue imposing sentences far below the Guidelines range. These proposed changes better capture the seriousness of the offense and the culpability of the offender, even if they do not resolve the fundamental tension between individualized sentencing and the rigid quantification that characterizes the Guidelines system.

ESSAY CONTENTS INTRODUCTION I. BACKGROUND ON INDIGENT DEFENSE IN PHILADELPHIA II. QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE PERFORMANCE OF THE PUBLIC DEFENDER VERSUS APPOINTED COUNSEL A. Data and Sample Construction B. Methods: [...], One in five indigent murder defendants in Philadelphia is randomly assigned representation by public defenders while the remainder receive court-appointed private attorneys. We exploit this random assignment to measure how defense counsel affect murder case outcomes. Compared to appointed counsel, public defenders in Philadelphia reduce their clients' murder conviction rate by 19% and lower the probability that their clients receive a life sentence by 62%. Public defenders reduce overall expected time served in prison by 24%. We find no difference in the overall number of charges of which defendants are found guilty. When we apply methods used in past studies of the effect of counsel that did not use random assignment, we obtain far more modest estimated impacts, which suggests defendant sorting is an important confounder affecting past research. To understand possible explanations for the disparity in outcomes, we interviewed judges, public defenders, and attorneys who took appointments. Interviewees identified a variety of institutional factors in Philadelphia that decreased the likelihood that appointed counsel would prepare cases as well as the public defenders. The vast difference in outcomes for defendants assigned different counsel types raises important questions about the adequacy and fairness of the criminal justice system.

The criminal law's formal criteria for assessing punishment are typically contained in criminal codes, the rules of which fix an offender's liability and the grade of the offense. A look [...]

Abstract: The Lay Assessor Act of 2004 mandated the creation of a mixed lay judge system, called the saibanin seido. Under this new system, jurors, or lay judges, sit with [...]

Teen Courts provide a forum in which juvenile offenders are sentenced by their peers. This system, based on principles of restorative justice, serves as an alternative to the traditional juvenile justice system. Sentencing options typically include restitution, community service, jury duty, apologies, attendance at educational workshops, and tours of correctional facilities. Previous research has examined the effectiveness of Teen Courts but little is known about how sentencing decisions are made. The purpose of this study was to assess how adolescent jurors make such decisions in one Teen Court program. The authors observe 32 Teen Court trials and deliberations and question 98 adolescent jurors about their sentencing choices. Results show that the deliberations are fairly cursory and that jurors have poor recollections of what evidence had been presented. Still, they put more weight on evidentiary information than on extralegal factors, and were motivated by a desire to rehabilitate offenders and set them on a socially acceptable path--goals consistent with restorative justice objectives on which Teen Court programs are based. Keywords: juvenile justice; teen court; sentencing

The effect of legal and extralegal factors on felony sentence outcomes has been widely studied, typically using a total incarceration variable that defines sentence outcomes as incarceration or probation. Research conducted by Holleran and Spohn has called this into question, revealing that factors that affected jail sentences were different than those that affected prison sentences and demonstrating that the conclusions one would draw regarding the influence of extralegal offender characteristics such as race and ethnicity differ depending on the way in which sentence was defined. The authors replicate and extend the research conducted by Holleran and Spohn, using several operational definitions of the decision to incarcerate or not, focusing on sentence outcomes for offenders convicted of felonies in a jurisdiction with an indeterminate sentencing system. Results provide compelling evidence in support of Holleran and Spohn. Keywords: sentencing; prison; jail

Objective: To determine significant predictors of severity of sentencing of sex offenders of minors in a jurisdiction which obtains many confessions. Method: Data were abstracted from 323 criminal court case records of sexually abused minors over 11 years in a county which places a high priority on sexual abuse prosecution. The sample used in this analysis consisted of 218 men who received a sentence for a sex offense. Multiple regression analysis was used to examine what factors predicted severity of sentences. Specifically this study explores whether, in a county which is very successful in obtaining confessions to sexual abuse of children, the severity of sentence is explained by the seriousness of the crime (more severe type of sexual abuse, younger age of the victim, prior conviction of a sex offense, and abusing more than one child), or by factors unrelated to the seriousness of the offense, offender confession and/or having a court-appointed attorney. Results: Factors that predicted the severity of the sentence were the seriousness of the sex crime, prior conviction of a sex crime, and young age of the victim. Conclusions: This community, with a high confession rate and a high conviction rate, imposed sentences that were consistent with the crimes, with more severe sentences for more serious crimes. Convenience factors, such as the fact the offender confessed, and systemic factors, such as having a court-appointed attorney, did not result in more severe sentences. Keywords: Sexual abuse; Criminal prosecution; Sentencing

The latest evolutionary phase of criminal sentencing is a return to determinate sentencing structures. However, the concurrent application of sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimum statutes in various jurisdictions often distorts and convolutes evaluations of such interventions' effectiveness. To remedy this problem, the effects of such distinct reforms must be separated from one another. Previous research has been unsuccessful in accomplishing this task. The authors attempt to remedy this deficiency by using 1997-1998 federal sentencing data to isolate the effects of the minima from those of the guidelines and assessing how the predictors and conditioners of sentencing outcomes vary between them. The authors find several significant and some unexpected differences in the effect of predictors across models of incarceration and sentence length for the two intervention types. Keywords: sentencing; sentencing guidelines; mandatory minimum statutes; determinate sentencing; federal courts; judicial decision making; drug offenses

After reading a murder or theft vignette in which the perpetrator was a 20-, 40-, or 60-year-old man, 95 undergraduates gave sentence and parole recommendations. Punishment was harsher for the murder than for the theft. For murder, participants treated the 20- and 60-year-old men less harshly than the 40-year-old man, which confirms previous archival findings. However, this inverted U-shaped function occurred for murder only. The authors discussed the results in the context of the just-desert and utilitarian rationales that guide sentencing and gave suggestions for future research. Key words: crime severity, defendant age, sentencing, THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM SHOULD BE FREE OF ANY BIAS that would influence a judge's or a jury's decisions concerning verdicts and recommendations for punishment. That is, judgments should be based [...]

It is increasingly being recognized that it is essential to know not only what is effective in reducing criminal behavior but also the relative costs and benefits of criminal justice interventions. While a number of studies now include such costs and benefits, the evidence is difficult to compare because of differing research designs and cost-benefit methodologies. This article systematically reviews the current evidence on the costs and benefits of different sentencing options. A cost-benefit validity scale is proposed as a mechanism to evaluate systematically the quality of costs and benefits data. A systematic review of the literature revealed only nine published studies that fit the criteria of the review. Many were of poor methodological quality, and the authors recommend the development of standardized methodologies for assessing the costs and benefits of criminal justice programs. Keywords: costs-benefits; sentencing; crime; review; effectiveness

Two samples of undergraduates (36 women, 7 men; 44 women, 45 men) read a mock transcript in which a murderer's victim was a man or a woman, after which they made prison sentence and death penalty judgments. Female judges gave longer sentences for the female victim than for the male victim, whereas male judges gave longer sentences for the male victim than for the female victim. This same-sex bias suggests that extralegal factors can affect judgments about sentencing.

Researchers discuss the position of rape survivors in the criminal justice system, their treatment and their involvement in such court proceedings as the actual sentencing of the convicted sex criminal. Focus is given to directing the research data into an evaluation of current victims' rights legislation and into a discussion regarding the creation of new rights legislation.