法官种族和性别对审前羁押决定的影响

IF 0.7 4区 社会学 Q3 Social Sciences Justice System Journal Pub Date : 2021-02-11 DOI:10.1080/0098261X.2021.1881665
Ethan D. Boldt, C. L. Boyd, R. Carlos, Matthew E. Baker
{"title":"法官种族和性别对审前羁押决定的影响","authors":"Ethan D. Boldt, C. L. Boyd, R. Carlos, Matthew E. Baker","doi":"10.1080/0098261X.2021.1881665","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The pretrial detention decision has critical implications for a defendant’s employment opportunities, family ties, likelihood of conviction, and length of prison sentence. While prior researchers have assessed the disparities that exist in the bail decision based on defendant and case characteristics, little systematic empirical attention has been paid to the effects of the pretrial detention judge on decisions at this stage of criminal case proceedings. Here, we focus specifically on judge race and sex, exploring not only the unconditional effects of judge sex and race but also whether the effects of these judge characteristics at the bail decision are conditioned on the sex and race of the defendant. Using newly collected pretrial detention data from 22 federal district courts from 2003 to 2013, we empirically examine the effects of judge and defendant race and sex on whether defendants are released on their own recognizance before trial or, instead, are given a more punitive pretrial outcome. Our results indicate important judge and defendant-based differences in bail setting leniency provided to defendants including that Black judges are more likely to grant pretrial release without hefty conditions to white defendants than are white judges. We also find that female judges are more likely to detain or require monetary bail for male defendants and less likely to do so for female defendants relative to male judges.","PeriodicalId":45509,"journal":{"name":"Justice System Journal","volume":"9 1","pages":"341 - 358"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Effects of Judge Race and Sex on Pretrial Detention Decisions\",\"authors\":\"Ethan D. Boldt, C. L. Boyd, R. Carlos, Matthew E. Baker\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/0098261X.2021.1881665\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The pretrial detention decision has critical implications for a defendant’s employment opportunities, family ties, likelihood of conviction, and length of prison sentence. While prior researchers have assessed the disparities that exist in the bail decision based on defendant and case characteristics, little systematic empirical attention has been paid to the effects of the pretrial detention judge on decisions at this stage of criminal case proceedings. Here, we focus specifically on judge race and sex, exploring not only the unconditional effects of judge sex and race but also whether the effects of these judge characteristics at the bail decision are conditioned on the sex and race of the defendant. Using newly collected pretrial detention data from 22 federal district courts from 2003 to 2013, we empirically examine the effects of judge and defendant race and sex on whether defendants are released on their own recognizance before trial or, instead, are given a more punitive pretrial outcome. Our results indicate important judge and defendant-based differences in bail setting leniency provided to defendants including that Black judges are more likely to grant pretrial release without hefty conditions to white defendants than are white judges. We also find that female judges are more likely to detain or require monetary bail for male defendants and less likely to do so for female defendants relative to male judges.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45509,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Justice System Journal\",\"volume\":\"9 1\",\"pages\":\"341 - 358\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Justice System Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2021.1881665\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Justice System Journal","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2021.1881665","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

审前拘留决定对被告的就业机会、家庭关系、定罪的可能性和刑期长短具有重要影响。虽然先前的研究人员已经根据被告和案件特征评估了保释决定中存在的差异,但很少有系统的实证关注审前拘留法官在刑事案件诉讼这一阶段对决定的影响。本文以法官的种族和性别为研究对象,不仅探讨了法官的性别和种族对保释决定的无条件影响,还探讨了这些法官特征对保释决定的影响是否取决于被告的性别和种族。利用2003年至2013年22个联邦地区法院新收集的审前羁押数据,我们实证检验了法官和被告的种族和性别对被告是在审判前自行释放,还是在审判前获得更具惩罚性的审判结果的影响。我们的研究结果表明,法官和被告在提供给被告的保释设置宽大处理方面存在重要差异,包括黑人法官比白人法官更有可能给予白人被告审前释放,而不附带苛刻的条件。我们还发现,与男性法官相比,女性法官更有可能拘留男性被告或要求保释,而女性被告则不太可能这样做。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The Effects of Judge Race and Sex on Pretrial Detention Decisions
Abstract The pretrial detention decision has critical implications for a defendant’s employment opportunities, family ties, likelihood of conviction, and length of prison sentence. While prior researchers have assessed the disparities that exist in the bail decision based on defendant and case characteristics, little systematic empirical attention has been paid to the effects of the pretrial detention judge on decisions at this stage of criminal case proceedings. Here, we focus specifically on judge race and sex, exploring not only the unconditional effects of judge sex and race but also whether the effects of these judge characteristics at the bail decision are conditioned on the sex and race of the defendant. Using newly collected pretrial detention data from 22 federal district courts from 2003 to 2013, we empirically examine the effects of judge and defendant race and sex on whether defendants are released on their own recognizance before trial or, instead, are given a more punitive pretrial outcome. Our results indicate important judge and defendant-based differences in bail setting leniency provided to defendants including that Black judges are more likely to grant pretrial release without hefty conditions to white defendants than are white judges. We also find that female judges are more likely to detain or require monetary bail for male defendants and less likely to do so for female defendants relative to male judges.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
14.30%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: The Justice System Journal is an interdisciplinary journal that publishes original research articles on all aspects of law, courts, court administration, judicial behavior, and the impact of all of these on public and social policy. Open as to methodological approaches, The Justice System Journal aims to use the latest in advanced social science research and analysis to bridge the gap between practicing and academic law, courts and politics communities. The Justice System Journal invites submission of original articles and research notes that are likely to be of interest to scholars and practitioners in the field of law, courts, and judicial administration, broadly defined. Articles may draw on a variety of research approaches in the social sciences. The journal does not publish articles devoted to extended analysis of legal doctrine such as a law review might publish, although short manuscripts analyzing cases or legal issues are welcome and will be considered for the Legal Notes section. The Justice System Journal was created in 1974 by the Institute for Court Management and is published under the auspices of the National Center for State Courts. The Justice System Journal features peer-reviewed research articles as well as reviews of important books in law and courts, and analytical research notes on some of the leading cases from state and federal courts. The journal periodically produces special issues that provide analysis of fundamental and timely issues on law and courts from both national and international perspectives.
期刊最新文献
State Supreme Court Responsiveness to Court Curbing: Examining the Use of Judicial Review The Effects of Jurors’ Initial Views of Jury Service on Predeliberation Preferences for Prosecution or Defense Emerging Hardball Confirmation Tactics and Public Support for the U.S. Supreme Court A War of Words Over Abortion: The Legal-Framing Contest Over the Undue Burden Standard Letter from the Editor
×
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