IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pra/mprapa/57834.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Motivational structures underlying judicial discretion: An information theoretic investigation

Author

Listed:
  • Bhati, Avinash

Abstract

Judicial discretion has rightly been termed a puzzle. Given the several competing concerns that can influence judges when they sanction offenders and the institutional structures that typically constrain their decisions, the task of uncovering the motivational structures underlying judicial discretion has proven very challenging for scholars. This paper develops a behavioral model of federal judges exercising discretion pursuant to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and derives testable implications regarding the amount of prison term they impose on convicted offenders. An information theoretic approach is used to investigate these assertions. The data reveal a host of information about judicial discretion including how various factors affect sanctioning decisions, how variation in case and offender attributes heighten or reduce judicial concerns, how judges juggle various competing concerns while exercising discretion, and how compliance with the guidelines competes with other judicial concerns.

Suggested Citation

  • Bhati, Avinash, 2009. "Motivational structures underlying judicial discretion: An information theoretic investigation," MPRA Paper 57834, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    • Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:57834
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/57834/1/MPRA_paper_57834.pdf
    File Function: original version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary S. Becker, 1974. "Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach," NBER Chapters, in: Essays in the Economics of Crime and Punishment, pages 1-54, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. 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.
    3. Ryu, Hang K., 1993. "Maximum entropy estimation of density and regression functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 397-440, April.
    4. 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.
    5. Wu, Ximing, 2003. "Calculation of maximum entropy densities with application to income distribution," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 115(2), pages 347-354, August.
    6. Golan, Amos & Judge, George G. & Miller, Douglas, 1996. "Maximum Entropy Econometrics," Staff General Research Papers Archive 1488, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    7. 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.
    8. Heckman, James, 2013. "Sample selection bias as a specification error," Applied Econometrics, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (RANEPA), vol. 31(3), pages 129-137.
    9. Unknown, 1958. "The Australian Agricultural Economics Society," Review of Marketing and Agricultural Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 26(03), pages 1-1, September.
    10. Cohen, Mark A, 1991. "Explaining Judicial Behavior or What's "Unconstitutional" about the Sentencing Commission?," The Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization, Oxford University Press, vol. 7(1), pages 183-199, Spring.
    11. Becker, Gary S, 1993. "Nobel Lecture: The Economic Way of Looking at Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(3), pages 385-409, June.
    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. Helen Tauchen, 2010. "Estimating the Supply of Crime: Recent Advances," Chapters, in: Bruce L. Benson & Paul R. Zimmerman (ed.), Handbook on the Economics of Crime, chapter 2, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    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. 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.
    4. Cécile Bourreau-Dubois & Bruno Deffains & Myriam Doriat-Duban & Bruno Jeandidier, 2021. "Guidelines: Decision-Making Tools for Litigantsand Judges [Les barèmes, outils d’aide à la décision pour les justiciables et les juges]," Post-Print hal-03054417, HAL.
    5. Douglas Cumming & Lars Hornuf & Moein Karami & Denis Schweizer, 2023. "Disentangling Crowdfunding from Fraudfunding," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 182(4), pages 1103-1128, February.
    6. Arturo Bris, 2005. "Do Insider Trading Laws Work?," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 11(3), pages 267-312, June.
    7. Jin, Justin & Nainar, Khalid & Sun, Chenwei, 2022. "Bank non-performing loans, loan charge-offs, and crime incidence," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    8. Wu, Ximing & Perloff, Jeffrey M., 2004. "China's Income Distribution Over Time: Reasons for Rising Inequality," Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, Working Paper Series qt9jw2v939, Institute of Industrial Relations, UC Berkeley.
    9. Schneider, Andreas, 2019. "Deterrence Theory in Paraguay: Exploring Fraud and Violation of Trust Cases," MPRA Paper 102204, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    10. Jorge Garcia Hombrados, 2018. "Empirical essays on development economics," Economics PhD Theses 0318, Department of Economics, University of Sussex Business School.
    11. Jimena Hurtado, 2005. "The Utilitarian Foundations Of The Economic Approach To Human Behavior," Documentos CEDE 3633, Universidad de los Andes, Facultad de Economía, CEDE.
    12. Dmitri V. Vinogradov & Elena V. Shadrina, 2018. "Discouragement through incentives," Working Papers 2018-05, Business School - Economics, University of Glasgow.
    13. Lihui Zhang, 2016. "Are youth offenders responsive to changing sanctions? Evidence from the Canadian Youth Criminal Justice Act of 2003," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 49(2), pages 515-554, May.
    14. Laura Sour, 2004. "An Economic Model of Tax Compliance with Individual Morality and Group Conformity," Economía Mexicana NUEVA ÉPOCA, CIDE, División de Economía, vol. 0(1), pages 43-61, January-J.
    15. Zellner, Arnold & Tobias, Justin & Ryu, Hang, 1998. "Bayesian Method of Moments (BMOM) Analysis of Parametric and Semiparametric Regression Models," CUDARE Working Papers 198660, University of California, Berkeley, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
    16. 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.
    17. Entorf, Horst, 2011. "Turning 18: What a Difference Application of Adult Criminal Law Makes," IZA Discussion Papers 5434, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    18. Rolf Becker & Guido Mehlkop, 2006. "Social Class and Delinquency," Rationality and Society, , vol. 18(2), pages 193-235, May.
    19. Fallesen, Peter & Geerdsen, Lars Pico & Imai, Susumu & Tranæs, Torben, 2018. "The effect of active labor market policies on crime: Incapacitation and program effects," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 263-286.
    20. Janet Currie & Michael Mueller-Smith & Maya Rossin-Slater, 2022. "Violence While in Utero: The Impact of Assaults during Pregnancy on Birth Outcomes," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 104(3), pages 525-540, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Judicial discretion; utility maximization; information theory; limited discretionary regimes;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • K40 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - General

    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:pra:mprapa:57834. 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: Joachim Winter (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfmunde.html .

    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.