{"title":"让吉迪恩计数?黑人、白人和拉丁裔个人的公设辩护人资源和重罪案件结果","authors":"Aaron Gottlieb","doi":"10.1177/21533687211006456","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although Gideon v. Wainright has provided indigent defendants potentially facing prison time the right to counsel, commentators and scholars have documented that the public defense system is vastly underfunded and currently in crisis. However, research has rarely examined how public defender resources impact case outcomes, and the research that does exist has yet, to my knowledge, examine how these resources impact racial disparities in case outcomes. By merging data from the Census of Public Defender Offices to data from the State Court Processing Statistics, I begin to fill this gap. Results from multivariate regression analyses with state-year fixed effects provide mixed evidence. Regardless of race, higher public defender and support staff caseloads tend to be associated with worse case outcomes. In the case of pretrial detention, I find that high public defender and support staff caseloads exacerbate Black-White disparities. With respect to sentence length, I find evidence that high public defender caseloads exacerbate Latinx-White disparities and some evidence that they mitigate Black-White disparities. In sum, these results provide strong support for the view that the public defender funding crisis harms indigent defendants regardless of race and mixed evidence regarding its impact on racial disparities in the criminal justice system.","PeriodicalId":45275,"journal":{"name":"Race and Justice","volume":"13 1","pages":"506 - 529"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-04-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/21533687211006456","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Making Gideon Count? Public Defender Resources and Felony Case Outcomes for Black, White, and Latinx Individuals\",\"authors\":\"Aaron Gottlieb\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21533687211006456\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although Gideon v. Wainright has provided indigent defendants potentially facing prison time the right to counsel, commentators and scholars have documented that the public defense system is vastly underfunded and currently in crisis. However, research has rarely examined how public defender resources impact case outcomes, and the research that does exist has yet, to my knowledge, examine how these resources impact racial disparities in case outcomes. By merging data from the Census of Public Defender Offices to data from the State Court Processing Statistics, I begin to fill this gap. Results from multivariate regression analyses with state-year fixed effects provide mixed evidence. Regardless of race, higher public defender and support staff caseloads tend to be associated with worse case outcomes. In the case of pretrial detention, I find that high public defender and support staff caseloads exacerbate Black-White disparities. With respect to sentence length, I find evidence that high public defender caseloads exacerbate Latinx-White disparities and some evidence that they mitigate Black-White disparities. In sum, these results provide strong support for the view that the public defender funding crisis harms indigent defendants regardless of race and mixed evidence regarding its impact on racial disparities in the criminal justice system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45275,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Race and Justice\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"506 - 529\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-04-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/21533687211006456\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Race and Justice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21533687211006456\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Race and Justice","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21533687211006456","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Making Gideon Count? Public Defender Resources and Felony Case Outcomes for Black, White, and Latinx Individuals
Although Gideon v. Wainright has provided indigent defendants potentially facing prison time the right to counsel, commentators and scholars have documented that the public defense system is vastly underfunded and currently in crisis. However, research has rarely examined how public defender resources impact case outcomes, and the research that does exist has yet, to my knowledge, examine how these resources impact racial disparities in case outcomes. By merging data from the Census of Public Defender Offices to data from the State Court Processing Statistics, I begin to fill this gap. Results from multivariate regression analyses with state-year fixed effects provide mixed evidence. Regardless of race, higher public defender and support staff caseloads tend to be associated with worse case outcomes. In the case of pretrial detention, I find that high public defender and support staff caseloads exacerbate Black-White disparities. With respect to sentence length, I find evidence that high public defender caseloads exacerbate Latinx-White disparities and some evidence that they mitigate Black-White disparities. In sum, these results provide strong support for the view that the public defender funding crisis harms indigent defendants regardless of race and mixed evidence regarding its impact on racial disparities in the criminal justice system.
期刊介绍:
Race and Justice: An International Journal serves as a quarterly forum for the best scholarship on race, ethnicity, and justice. Of particular interest to the journal are policy-oriented papers that examine how race/ethnicity intersects with justice system outcomes across the globe. The journal is also open to research that aims to test or expand theoretical perspectives exploring the intersection of race/ethnicity, class, gender, and justice. The journal is open to scholarship from all disciplinary origins and methodological approaches (qualitative and/or quantitative).Topics of interest to Race and Justice include, but are not limited to, research that focuses on: Legislative enactments, Policing Race and Justice, Courts, Sentencing, Corrections (community-based, institutional, reentry concerns), Juvenile Justice, Drugs, Death penalty, Public opinion research, Hate crime, Colonialism, Victimology, Indigenous justice systems.