IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ucp/jlawec/v42y1999i1p271-307.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring Interjedge Sentencing Disparity: Before and After the Federal Sentencing Guidelines

Author

Listed:
  • Anderson, James M
  • Kling, Jeffrey R
  • Stith, Kate

Abstract

This paper evaluates the impact of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines on interjudge sentencing disparity, which is defined as the differences in average nominal prison sentence lengths for comparable caseloads assigned to different judges. This disparity is measured as the dispersion of a random effect in a zero-inflated negative binomial model. The results show that the expected difference between two typical judges in the average sentence length was about 17 percent (or 4.9 months) in 1986-87 prior to the Guidelines and fell to about 11 percent (or 3.9 months) in 1988-93 during the early years of the Guidelines. We have not sought to measure the effect of parole in the pre-Guidelines period, other sources of disparity such as prosecutorial discretion, or the proportionality of punishment under the Guidelines as compared with the pre-Guidelines era. Copyright 1999 by the University of Chicago.

Suggested Citation

  • Anderson, James M & Kling, Jeffrey R & Stith, Kate, 1999. "Measuring Interjedge Sentencing Disparity: Before and After the Federal Sentencing Guidelines," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 42(1), pages 271-307, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:v:42:y:1999:i:1:p:271-307
    DOI: 10.1086/467426
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/467426
    Download Restriction: Access to the online full text or PDF requires a subscription.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1086/467426?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or search for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lott, John R, Jr, 1992. "Do We Punish High Income Criminals Too Heavily?," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 30(4), pages 583-608, October.
    2. Payne, A. Abigail, 1997. "Does inter-judge disparity really matter? An analysis of the effects of sentencing reforms in three federal district courts," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 337-366, September.
    3. Mullahy, John, 1986. "Specification and testing of some modified count data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 341-365, December.
    4. N/A, 1997. "Letter To Editor," Energy & Environment, , vol. 8(2), pages 177-177, June.
    5. Lott, John R, Jr & Bronars, Stephen G, 1993. "Time Series Evidence on Shirking in the U.S. House of Representatives," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 76(1-2), pages 125-149, June.
    6. Hausman, Jerry & Hall, Bronwyn H & Griliches, Zvi, 1984. "Econometric Models for Count Data with an Application to the Patents-R&D Relationship," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 52(4), pages 909-938, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christopher J. W. Zorn, 1998. "An Analytic and Empirical Examination of Zero-Inflated and Hurdle Poisson Specifications," Sociological Methods & Research, , vol. 26(3), pages 368-400, February.
    2. Niklas Elert, 2014. "What determines entry? Evidence from Sweden," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 53(1), pages 55-92, August.
    3. Gurmu, Shiferaw & Rilstone, Paul & Stern, Steven, 1998. "Semiparametric estimation of count regression models1," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 123-150, November.
    4. Ulf‐ G. Gerdtham, 1997. "Equity in Health Care Utilization: Further Tests Based on Hurdle Models and Swedish Micro Data," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 6(3), pages 303-319, May.
    5. Filippo Belloc & Eleonora Laurenza & M. Alessandra Rossi, 2016. "Corporate governance effects on innovation when both agency costs and asset specificity matter," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 25(6), pages 977-999.
    6. Sarker, Rakhal & Surry, Yves R., 2003. "The Fast Decay Process In Recreational Demand Activities And The Use Of Alternative Count Data Models," Working Papers 34147, University of Guelph, Department of Food, Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    7. Massimo Filippini & Giuliano Masiero & Diego Medici, 2012. "The demand for school meals: an analysis of stated choices by Swiss households," Quaderni della facoltà di Scienze economiche dell'Università di Lugano 1204, USI Università della Svizzera italiana.
    8. José M. R. Murteira & Mário A. G. Augusto, 2017. "Hurdle models of repayment behaviour in personal loan contracts," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 53(2), pages 641-667, September.
    9. Rainer Winkelmann, 2015. "Counting on count data models," IZA World of Labor, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA), pages 148-148, May.
    10. Jeremy Foltz & Bradford Barham & Kwansoo Kim, 2000. "Universities and agricultural biotechnology patent production," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(1), pages 82-95.
    11. Majo, M.C., 2010. "A microeconometric analysis of health care utilization in Europe," Other publications TiSEM 1cf5fd2f-8146-4ef8-8eb5-e, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Gamba, Simona, 2017. "The Effect of Intellectual Property Rights on Domestic Innovation in the Pharmaceutical Sector," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 99(C), pages 15-27.
    13. McLeod, Logan, 2011. "A nonparametric vs. latent class model of general practitioner utilization: Evidence from Canada," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 1261-1279.
    14. W. David Allen, 2002. "Crime, Punishment, and Recidivism," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 3(1), pages 39-60, February.
    15. Xiaodi Xie, 1997. "Children and female labour supply behaviour," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(10), pages 1303-1310.
    16. Margarita E. Romero Rodríguez & Enrique Los Arcos & Victor Cano Fernández & Miguel Sánchez Padrón, 2001. "Modelo para datos de recuentro de corte transversal con exceso de ceros. Aplicación a citas patentes," Documentos de trabajo conjunto ULL-ULPGC 2001-05, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas de la ULPGC.
    17. Crepon, Bruno & Duguet, Emmanuel, 1997. "Research and development, competition and innovation pseudo-maximum likelihood and simulated maximum likelihood methods applied to count data models with heterogeneity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 355-378, August.
    18. Baudry, Marc & Dumont, Beatrice, 2006. "Comparing firms' triadic patent applications across countries: Is there a gap in terms of R&D effort or a gap in terms of performances?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(2), pages 324-342, March.
    19. Erik Brouwer & Alfred Kleinknecht & Pierre Mohnen & Hans van Ophem, 2001. "R&D and Patents: Which Way Does the Causality Run?," CIRANO Working Papers 2001s-31, CIRANO.
    20. Mustard, David B, 2001. "Racial, Ethnic, and Gender Disparities in Sentencing: Evidence from the U.S. Federal Courts," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(1), pages 285-314, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K4 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior
    • C5 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ucp:jlawec:v:42:y:1999:i:1:p:271-307. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Journals Division (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/JLE .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.