CORRECTIONS FOR RACIAL DISPARITIES IN LAW ENFORCEMENT.

Christopher L. Griffin, F. Sloan, Lindsey M. Eldred
{"title":"CORRECTIONS FOR RACIAL DISPARITIES IN LAW ENFORCEMENT.","authors":"Christopher L. Griffin, F. Sloan, Lindsey M. Eldred","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2104182","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Much empirical analysis has documented racial disparities at the beginning and end stages of a criminal case. However, our understanding about the perpetuation of - and even corrections for - differential outcomes as the process unfolds remains less than complete. This Article provides a comprehensive examination of criminal dispositions using all DWI cases in North Carolina during the period 2001-2011, focusing on several major decision points in the process. Starting with pretrial hearings and culminating in sentencing results, we track differences in outcomes by race and gender. Before sentencing, significant gaps emerge in the severity of pretrial release conditions that disadvantage black and Hispanic defendants. Yet when prosecutors decide whether to pursue charges, we observe an initial correction mechanism: Hispanic men are almost two-thirds more likely to have those charges dropped relative to white men. Although few cases survive after the plea bargaining stage, a second correction mechanism arises: Hispanic men are substantially less likely to receive harsher sentences and are sent to jail for significantly less time relative to white men. The first mechanism is based in part on prosecutors' reviewing the strength of the evidence but much more on declining to invest scarce resources in the pursuit of defendants who fail to appear for trial. The second mechanism seems to follow more directly from judicial discretion to reverse decisions made by law enforcement. We discuss possible explanations for these novel empirical results and review methods for more precisely identifying causal mechanisms in criminal justice.","PeriodicalId":75324,"journal":{"name":"William and Mary law review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-05-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"William and Mary law review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2104182","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Much empirical analysis has documented racial disparities at the beginning and end stages of a criminal case. However, our understanding about the perpetuation of - and even corrections for - differential outcomes as the process unfolds remains less than complete. This Article provides a comprehensive examination of criminal dispositions using all DWI cases in North Carolina during the period 2001-2011, focusing on several major decision points in the process. Starting with pretrial hearings and culminating in sentencing results, we track differences in outcomes by race and gender. Before sentencing, significant gaps emerge in the severity of pretrial release conditions that disadvantage black and Hispanic defendants. Yet when prosecutors decide whether to pursue charges, we observe an initial correction mechanism: Hispanic men are almost two-thirds more likely to have those charges dropped relative to white men. Although few cases survive after the plea bargaining stage, a second correction mechanism arises: Hispanic men are substantially less likely to receive harsher sentences and are sent to jail for significantly less time relative to white men. The first mechanism is based in part on prosecutors' reviewing the strength of the evidence but much more on declining to invest scarce resources in the pursuit of defendants who fail to appear for trial. The second mechanism seems to follow more directly from judicial discretion to reverse decisions made by law enforcement. We discuss possible explanations for these novel empirical results and review methods for more precisely identifying causal mechanisms in criminal justice.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
纠正执法中的种族差异。
许多实证分析已经在刑事案件的开始和结束阶段记录了种族差异。然而,随着这一进程的展开,我们对差异结果的延续乃至纠正的理解仍然不够完整。本文对2001年至2011年期间北卡罗来纳州所有酒后驾车案件的刑事处置进行了全面考察,重点关注了该过程中的几个主要决策点。从审前听证会开始,到最终的判决结果,我们追踪了不同种族和性别的结果差异。在宣判之前,审前释放条件的严重程度出现了明显的差距,不利于黑人和西班牙裔被告。然而,当检察官决定是否追究指控时,我们观察到一种初步的纠正机制:与白人男性相比,西班牙裔男性被撤销指控的可能性几乎高出三分之二。虽然很少有案例能在辩诉交易阶段幸存下来,但第二种纠正机制出现了:与白人男性相比,西班牙裔男性受到更严厉判决的可能性要小得多,而且被送进监狱的时间也要短得多。第一种机制部分基于检察官审查证据的力度,但更多的是基于拒绝将稀缺资源投入到追捕未能出庭受审的被告上。第二种机制似乎更直接地遵循司法自由裁量权来推翻执法部门做出的决定。我们讨论了对这些新的实证结果的可能解释,并回顾了更精确地识别刑事司法因果机制的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
GENETIC DUTIES. Functional Corporate Knowledge THE GENETIC INFORMATION NONDISCRIMINATION ACT AT AGE 10: GINA'S CONTROVERSIAL ASSERTION THAT DATA TRANSPARENCY PROTECTS PRIVACY AND CIVIL RIGHTS. Prosecuting Poverty, Criminalizing Care Pereira's Aftershocks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1