IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cer/papers/wp715.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sentencing Decisions Around Quantity Thresholds: Theory and Experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Jakub Drapal
  • Michal Soltes

Abstract

We study the implications of the structure of criminal codes on sentencing decisions. To limit sentencing disparities, criminal codes typically divide offenses into subsections with specific sentencing ranges. The classification into corresponding subsections often depends on exceeding a given quantity threshold, such as drug amount. We study the consequences of these quantity thresholds on sentencing decisions and argue that the threshold effect can be decomposed into two opposing mechanisms: the severity mechanism and the reference one. An experiment with Czech prosecutors shows that thresholds drive substantial increases in sentences, leading to sentencing disparities. We further introduce empirical measures of (in)justice and quantify the consequences of quantity thresholds on the probability of imposing a just sentence.

Suggested Citation

  • Jakub Drapal & Michal Soltes, 2021. "Sentencing Decisions Around Quantity Thresholds: Theory and Experiment," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp715, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    • Handle: RePEc:cer:papers:wp715
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.cerge-ei.cz/pdf/wp/Wp715.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. David Bjerk, 2017. "Mandatory Minimums and the Sentencing of Federal Drug Crimes," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 46(1), pages 93-128.
    3. Bjerk, David, 2005. "Making the Crime Fit the Penalty: The Role of Prosecutorial Discretion under Mandatory Minimum Sentencing," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 48(2), pages 591-625, October.
    4. Ekaterina Travova, 2019. "Under Pressure? Performance Evaluation of Police Officers as an Incentive to Cheat: Evidence from Drug Crimes in Russia," CERGE-EI Working Papers wp637, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague.
    5. Mandeep K. Dhami & Ian K. Belton & Elizabeth Merrall & Andrew McGrath & Sheila M. Bird, 2020. "Criminal Sentencing by Preferred Numbers," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(1), pages 139-163, March.
    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. Estelle, Sarah M. & Phillips, David C., 2018. "Smart sentencing guidelines: The effect of marginal policy changes on recidivism," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 270-293.
    2. Beth A. Freeborn & Monica E. Hartmann, 2010. "Judicial Discretion and Sentencing Behavior: Did the Feeney Amendment Rein in District Judges?," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 7(2), pages 355-378, June.
    3. Richard T. Boylan, 2012. "The Effect of Punishment Severity on Plea Bargaining," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 55(3), pages 565-591.
    4. Freeborn, Beth & Hartmann, Monica, 2009. "Judicial Discretion and Sentencing Behavior," MPRA Paper 13880, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Samantha Bielen & Peter Grajzl, 2021. "Prosecution or Persecution? Extraneous Events and Prosecutorial Decisions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 18(4), pages 765-800, December.
    6. Sarah Esther Lageson, 2016. "Found Out and Opting Out," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 665(1), pages 127-141, May.
    7. Max M. Schanzenbach, 2015. "Racial Disparities, Judge Characteristics, and Standards of Review in Sentencing," Journal of Institutional and Theoretical Economics (JITE), Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 171(1), pages 27-47, March.
    8. Max Schanzenbach, 2005. "Racial and Sex Disparities in Prison Sentences: The Effect of District-Level Judicial Demographics," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 34(1), pages 57-92, January.
    9. Thomas J. Miceli, 2008. "Criminal Sentencing Guidelines And Judicial Discretion," Contemporary Economic Policy, Western Economic Association International, vol. 26(2), pages 207-215, April.
    10. Jeffrey R. Kling, 2006. "Incarceration Length, Employment, and Earnings," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(3), pages 863-876, June.
    11. M. Marit Rehavi & Sonja B. Starr, 2014. "Racial Disparity in Federal Criminal Sentences," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 122(6), pages 1320-1354.
    12. Chen, Daniel L. & Prescott, J.J., 2016. "Implicit Egoism in Sentencing Decisions: First Letter Name Effects with Randomly Assigned Defendants," IAST Working Papers 16-56, Institute for Advanced Study in Toulouse (IAST).
    13. Bjerk, David J., 2016. "Mandatory Minimum Policy Reform and the Sentencing of Crack Cocaine Defendants: An Analysis of the Fair Sentencing Act," IZA Discussion Papers 10237, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Christmann, Robin, 2018. "Prosecution and Conviction under Hindsight Bias in Adversary Legal Systems," MPRA Paper 84870, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Todd Sorensen & Supriya Sarnikar & Ronald L. Oaxaca, 2012. "Race and Gender Differences under Federal Sentencing Guidelines," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(3), pages 256-260, May.
    16. Crystal S. Yang, 2015. "Free at Last? Judicial Discretion and Racial Disparities in Federal Sentencing," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(1), pages 75-111.
    17. David S. Abrams & Marianne Bertrand & Sendhil Mullainathan, 2012. "Do Judges Vary in Their Treatment of Race?," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 347-383.
    18. Magdalena Flatscher-Thöni & Andrea M. Leiter & Hannes Winner, 2019. "Are Pain and Suffering Awards (Un-)Predictable? Evidence from Germany," DANUBE: Law and Economics Review, European Association Comenius - EACO, issue 3, pages 199-219, September.
    19. Rafael Di Tella & Ernesto Schargrodsky, 2013. "Criminal Recidivism after Prison and Electronic Monitoring," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(1), pages 28-73.
    20. Bekkerman, Anton & Gilpin, Gregory A., 2014. "Can equitable punishment be mandated? Estimating impacts of sentencing guidelines on disciplinary disparities," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 51-61.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    sentencing; quantity threshold; sentencing disparities;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cer:papers:wp715. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: . General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eiacacz.html .

    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: Lucie Vasiljevova (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/eiacacz.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.