Project Director: Brian Ostrom, Ph.D. National Center for State Courts Assessing Consistency & Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
What Works in Sentencing? Evidence from the United States Cassia Spohn School of Criminology and Criminal Justice Arizona State University.
Advertisements

Punishment and Sentencing
JUDICIAL CONCURRENCE Preliminary FY2007. Preliminary FY2007 Guideline Worksheets Keyed as of 3/5/07 (N=10,715)
Sentencing Structure Comparisons Barb Tombs July 16, 2007 Presentation to the CT Sentencing Task Force Subcommittees.
Plea Bargaining Decisions in U. S
Project Director: Brian Ostrom, Ph.D. National Center for State Courts Assessing Consistency & Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States.
Chapter Topics The Courtroom Work Group
Racial Disparities in Criminal Justice in Wisconsin Pamela Oliver.
California Static Risk Assessment (CSRA)
Poli 103A California Politics Crime and Punishment II: Race and Crime.
Study of Virginia’s Parole- Eligible Inmate Population.
Re-Entry and Recidivism
MILWAUKEE COUNTY’S PRETRIAL RELEASE DECISION PROCESS & PRETRIAL SERVICES RE-DESIGN PRESENTED TO THE MILWAUKEE COUNTY COMMUNITY JUSTICE COUNCIL JULY 24,
CHAPTER EIGHT SENTENCING.
Community Corrections.  Community Corrections are the subfield of corrections in which offenders are supervised and provided services outside jail or.
June 9, 2014 Two Decades of Truth-in-Sentencing in Virginia VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION.
Sentencing and Punishment
CJ 600. Crime trends UCR since 1930s Victimization studies since the 1970s Lower rates during the 1930s, decline in the 1940s, rise beginning in the late.
Chapter 11 Punishment and Sentencing
Do Judges Vary in Their Treatment of Race? David Abrams (U of Chicago) Marianne Bertrand (U of Chicago) Sendhil Mullainathan (Harvard) June 5, 2007.
Sentencing and Parole in Canada
Re-validation of the Nonviolent Offender Risk Assessment Instrument: Preliminary Findings.
Crimes Committed in the Presence of Children Proposed Methodology for 2008 Study.
Proposed Study: Probation/Suspended Sentence Violations Scored on the Felony Sentencing Guidelines.
Aim: What are the guidelines for imposing sentences upon a convicted person?
D.C. VOLUNTARY SENTENCING GUIDELINES ADVANCED TRAINING: HOW TO CALCULATE A DEFENDANT’S CRIMINAL HISTORY SCORE D.C. Sentencing and Criminal Code Revision.
September 8, 2014 VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION Two Decades of Truth-in- Sentencing in Virginia Update.
Escapes from Custody and Violence: A Critical Analysis 1 Bryce E. Peterson Adam G. Fera Jeff Mellow John Jay College/CUNY Graduate Center.
November 5, 2014 New Nonviolent Offender Risk Assessment Instruments – Status Update VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION.
Assessment and Treatment of DWI Offenders in Maryland : Current Findings Prepared by: Amelia M. Arria, Ph.D. Center for Substance Abuse Research.
1 The MDOC Five Year Plan to Control Prison Growth Phase III: Long Term Policy Options SUMMARY BRIEF SUMMARY BRIEF Preliminary MDOC Proposal Revising Michigan’s.
The Judicial Branch.
Sentencing and the Presentence Investigation Report
Use of Offender Risk Assessment in Virginia Presentation at the 2012 NASC Conference Meredith Farrar-Owens Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission.
Lawsuits -Type of Civil Court Case -Lawsuits are when one person sues another for damages -Property Disputes -Contract Issues -Divorce -Negligence -Personal.
Lawsuits -Lawsuits are when one person sues another for damages -Property Disputes -Contract Issues -Divorce -Negligence-- Term explaining the idea that.
Overview of Split Sentencing Research October 25, 2006 Mark Rubin.
Larceny and Fraud Study Update. Background.
Comparative Perspectives on Sentencing Severity and Sentencing Alternatives Richard S. Frase University of Minnesota Symposium on Alternatives to Incarceration.
Salient Factor Score CTSFS99. What it is How to use it.
Juveniles Convicted in Circuit Court FY2001 – FY2008.
Sentencing: Once guilt has been determined, the next step is to decide what to do to the offender What should sentencing accomplish? Multiple goals of.
MINNESOTA SENTENCING GUIDELINES COMMISSION MEETING OUTCOMES: FIRST- AND SECOND-DEGREE CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE OFFENDERS April 18, 2013.
Legislative Impact Analysis for the 2008 General Assembly.
Proposed Topics for Possible Guidelines Revisions September 21, 2015 VIRGINIA CRIMINAL SENTENCING COMMISSION.
Review of Guidelines Worksheet Structure – Data Analysis.
Larceny and Fraud Study Update. Embezzlement Study The Commission conducted a study of felony embezzlement cases to examine the.
Pamela Oliver Pamela Oliver Presentation to Governor’s Commission May The Scope of the Problem & How to Measure it.
Review of Guidelines Worksheet Structure - Research Proposal.
Realignment: A One-year Examination of Offenders Released from State Prison in the First Six Months of Public Safety Realignment Association for Criminal.
Proposed Recommendations for Guidelines Revisions.
Virginia Sentencing Guidelines Preliminary FY2014 Report April 14, 2014.
POLI 103A CALIFORNIA POLITICS CRIME AND PUNISHMENT II: RACE AND CRIME.
2013 MONITORING DATA: SENTENCING PRACTICES DATA SUMMARY Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission September 18, 2014.
Racial Disparities in Criminal Justice in Wisconsin Pamela Oliver.
Georgia State Judicial Branch SS8CG4: SS8CG4: The student will analyze the role of the judicial branch in Georgia state government.
SENTENCING Overview/Review The “PSI” and “Risk Assessment” Sentencing Disparity Sentencing Guidelines Who Dictates Time Served?
Sentencing and the Correctional Process
Women in Oregon’s Criminal Justice System Women in Prison Conference November 7, 2015 Executive Director Mike Schmidt Oregon Criminal Justice Commission.
Race to Incarcerate Chapters 4-8 Regina Cavada Connor Warren.
© 2015 Cengage Learning Chapter 9 Punishment and Sentencing.
Multnomah County What Works Conference Craig Prins, Executive Director Michael Wilson, Economist Criminal Justice Commission 1.
Sentencing and Modern reform: the process of punishment
STANDARDS: SS8CG6 The student will explain how the Georgia court system treats juvenile offenders. a. Explain the difference between delinquent behavior.
Women in Oregon’s Criminal Justice System
Prisoners: Characteristics of U.S. Inmate Populations
Imposing the ‘Sentence’
An Evaluation of the D.C. Voluntary Sentencing Guidelines
Sentencing Commission Mandates and Probation Guidelines
Lawsuits -Lawsuits are when one person sues another for damages
Presentation transcript:

Project Director: Brian Ostrom, Ph.D. National Center for State Courts Assessing Consistency & Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States

What is the research goal? Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Consistency can be defined: Similarly situated offenders receive similar sentences Increasing certainty and predictability Reducing disparity Examining consistency in sentencing across 3 alternative sentencing guideline schemes: Michigan, Minnesota & Virginia

Why these 3 states? Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Well-respected systems Alternative design strategies Voluntary and presumptive Data is more readily obtainable Minnesota: presumptive, determinate, and tighter ranges Michigan: presumptive, indeterminate, and wider ranges Virginia: voluntary and widest ranges These states represent 3 distinct approaches to structuring judicial discretion

What is disparity? Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States General – when discriminatory factors play a role in sentencing Minnesota – uniform and proportional sentences not effected by race or gender Michigan – inconsistent and discriminatory sentences Virginia—absence of appropriate and just criminal penalties

Who is similarly situated? Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Similarly situated offenders Minnesota – 60 grid cells, 60 similarity groups Michigan – 256 grid cells, 256 similarity groups Virginia—who is similarly situated? Within a crime group Worksheet A & C score

What is the study approach & what type of data analysis is used? Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Empirical assessment of consistency in sentencing and how it relates to alternative sentencing guideline structures Analysis Multivariate statistical analysis (various techniques) Reviewing all other state guideline systems, and assessing impact of recent supreme court decisions Review and comment by commission and staff

What is the current status? Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Databases are assembled for all 3 states Statistical analysis is ongoing, VA was most recently added

Michigan - sample results Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Major finding: Local legal culture (LLC) appears to have greatest impact on sentence variation. Michigan has relatively large sentencing ranges – making it possible for LLC to have larger impact Where you are sentenced plays a significant role in the sentencing outcomes

Michigan – more sample results Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Using Circuit 3 (Detroit) as a baseline, 21 other circuits had significantly higher rate of imprisonment; 7 circuits had significantly lower rate of imprisonment Out-state offenders more likely to get prison and, if so, for longer times, differences are not due to offense and offender factors Results show that different sentences can be given while still complying with the guidelines.

Virginia Analysis Plan Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Focus on these individual crime groups: Assault Larceny Burglary Fraud Drugs Robbery Look at the decision making associated with Worksheet A – to model prison/no prison decision Worksheet C – to model prison sentence length decision

Virginia Initial Results -- Burglary Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States We explain less variation in sentencing in VA as compared to MI & MN (MN the most) We find no evidence of disparity based on race or gender, or circuit VA’s wider ranges make variation harder to explain

Virginia Initial Results -- Burglary Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Prison/no prison decision (Worksheet A) How well does the statistical model work? 79% correct prediction Model does 27% better than chance alone

Virginia Initial Results -- Burglary Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Prison/no prison decision (Worksheet A) Change in probability of state controlled sentence holding all else constant Firearm: 33% Felony Property Conviction (6-10): 21% Felony Property Convictions (11+): 24% Legally restrained other than parole: 17% Parole/post-release: 25%

Virginia Initial Results -- Burglary Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Prison sentence length (Worksheet C) How well does the statistical model work? 38% explained variance Comparison to other states Minnesota – 85% Michigan - 64%

Virginia Initial Results -- Burglary Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Prison sentence length (Worksheet C) Estimated impact holding all else constant Knife or firearm – increases sentence by 152% over what otherwise would get

Virginia Initial Results Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States Rate of prison sentences is similar for person crimes but higher for property and drug crimes What is current status of prison capacity? In general, do judges (or lawmakers?) perceive guideline ranges as wide?