The Legal/Extra-Legal Controversy: Judicial Decisions in Pretrial Release

This study analyzes data for state criminal defendants prosecuted in New York to determine the bases upon which judges make pretrial release decisions for these defendants. Treating statutory law as defining the category of legal variables, it finds legal factors substantially affect decisions about whether to release a defendant on recognizance, the amount of bail required, and whether to offer a defendant a cash alternative to a surety bond. The impact of these factors varies, however, depending upon the particular decision being made. Factors not prescribed in the statute-extra-legal factors—are also found to affect these pretrial release decisions. Their impact, too, is decision context specific. Among the extra-legal factors that affect pretrial release decisions, the effects of status characteristics of the defendant pale in comparison to the effects of bench bias and measures of the defendant\u27s dangerousness

Gender and Crime: Offense Patterns and Criminal Court Sanctions

The relation between gender and criminality is strong, and is likely to remain so. Women have traditionally been much less likely than men to commit violent crimes, and that pattern persists today. Rates of female involvement in some forms of property crime-notably petty theft and fraud-appear to be increasing. However, while the relative increase in women\u27s property crime involvement is significant, female participation even in these crimes remains far less than that of men. The relation of gender to case processing decisions in the criminal justice system varies from stage to stage. Although the pertinent literature is plagued by methodological and interpretive problems, several tentative conclusions can be offered. Women are more likely than men, other things equal, to be released on recognizance; however, when bail is set, the amount of bail does not appear to be affected by the defendant\u27s gender. There is no clear evidence that the defendant\u27s gender systematically affects prosecution, plea negotiation, or conviction decisions. In sentencing, however, women appear to receive systematic leniency except when they are convicted of high-severity offenses

Gender and Crime: Offense Patterns and Criminal Court Sanctions

The relation between gender and criminality is strong, and is likely to remain so. Women have traditionally been much less likely than men to commit violent crimes, and that pattern persists today. Rates of female involvement in some forms of property crime-notably petty theft and fraud-appear to be increasing. However, while the relative increase in women\u27s property crime involvement is significant, female participation even in these crimes remains far less than that of men. The relation of gender to case processing decisions in the criminal justice system varies from stage to stage. Although the pertinent literature is plagued by methodological and interpretive problems, several tentative conclusions can be offered. Women are more likely than men, other things equal, to be released on recognizance; however, when bail is set, the amount of bail does not appear to be affected by the defendant\u27s gender. There is no clear evidence that the defendant\u27s gender systematically affects prosecution, plea negotiation, or conviction decisions. In sentencing, however, women appear to receive systematic leniency except when they are convicted of high-severity offenses

The Sentencing of White-Collar Criminals in Federal Courts: A Socio-Legal Exploration of Disparity

This Article addresses that question by examining judicial sentencing philosophy as applied to white-collar criminality and reporting data that illuminate the operation of that philosophy. Part I of the Article argues that the traditional purposes and limits of criminal sentencing may plausibly justify either disparate or comparable sentences in cases of white-collar and common criminality. Part II describes the obstacles to an accurate empirical inquiry into how judges resolve these uncertainties in the theory of punishment. Part III presents a study designed to overcome as many of these obstacles as possible. What is most dramatic is that the resulting data do not appear to support the oft-presumed hypothesis that judges impose lighter sentences on high-status individuals convicted of white-collar crimes than they impose on lower-status individuals convicted of common crimes.4 The data, however, suggest that a significantly increased emphasis on the prosecution of white-collar crimes may encourage sentencing disparities in favor of those convicted as a result. These findings form the Article\u27s conclusion and a foundation for further research

The Federal Sentencing Guidelines for Corporations: Their Development, Theoretical Underpinnings, and Some Thoughts About Their Future

This Article traces the Sentencing Commission\u27s path in completing that task32 and considers what work lies ahead. The Article addresses four specific questions: (1) Given that the Commission\u27s primary mandate is to facilitate greater certainty, uniformity, effectiveness and rationality in the sentencing of individuals, why did the Commission tackle the area of corporate sentencing at all? (2) How did the Commission arrive at the philosophical bases that underlie the fine provisions of the corporate sentencing guidelines? (3) How did the principles of deterrence and just punishment for the offense shape the Commission\u27s decisionmaking with respect to the key structural issues involved in creating the corporate fine guidelines, and what other factors played a role in the construction of these guidelines? and (4) Are the corporate Sentencing Guidelines cast in stone, or can organizations and attorneys expect changes in the future