INDETERMINATE SENTENCE AND JUDICIAL BIAS

• NCJ Number: 16081
• Journal: Crime and Delinquency Volume: 20 Issue: 2 Dated: (APRIL 1974) Pages: 144-156
• Author(s): L CARGAN; M A COATES
• Date Published: 1974
• Length: 13 pages
• Corporate Author: National Council on Crime and Delinquency
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Statistics
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

STUDY WHICH TESTED THE HYPOTHESIS THAT, BECAUSE OF INDIVIDUAL JUDICIAL BIASES, THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE DOES NOT REDUCE SENTENCE DISPARITY.

Abstract

THE RECORDS OF FELONY CASES HANDLED BY THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF MONTGOMERY COUNTY, OHIO, WERE EXAMINED FOR A TWO-YEAR PERIOD. CONCENTRATED ON WERE THE SENTENCING PROCEDURES OF THE SIX REGULAR JUDGES IN EIGHT OFFENSE CATEGORIES, INCLUDING ROBBERY, FORGERY, BREAKING AND ENTERING, AND NARCOTICS VIOLATIONS. ALTHOUGH THE COURT SYSTEM USED THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE, THE STUDY FOUND DISPARITIES AMONG JUDGES IN OVERALL SENTENCING DISPARITY, AMONG DIFFERENT OFFENSES HANDLED BY THE SAME JUDGE, AND IN THE RELATIVE SEVERITY OF THE SENTENCE ACCORDING TO THE DEFENDANT'S RACE. TABLES ARE PRESENTED WHICH SHOW THE SENTENCES IMPOSED (IMPRISONMENT, PROBATION, FINE, OR SUSPENDED SENTENCE) BY EACH OF THE SIX JUDGES FOR EACH OFFENSE. THE AUTHORS CONCLUDE THAT THE USE OF THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE ALTERS, BUT DOES NOT ELIMINATE THE EXPRESSION OF JUDICIAL BIAS AS REFLECTED IN UNJUSTIFIED SENTENCING DISPARITIES.