The sentencing guidelines of different jurisdictions often have distinct objectives and approaches to sentencing. Drawing on the arguments of past research as well as focal concerns and populist punitiveness, the current research assesses whether or not differences in design and implementation of the sentencing guidelines of two systems (Pennsylvania and Oregon) influence the incarceration and sentence length decisions meted out to comparable sex offenders within these jurisdictions. The authors hypothesize that, despite having similar grid-based configurations, variations in the history and structure of these guidelines significantly influence predictors of sentencing outcomes across these jurisdictions. Using indecent assault and sexual abuse cases, this research explores how well the aforementioned orientations perform in explaining the incarceration and sentence length decisions within and across these two jurisdictions.
Aiken, L.S., & West, S.G. ( 1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions . Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
2.
Albonetti, C.A. ( 1986). Criminality, prosecutorial screening, and uncertainty: Theory of discretionary decision-making in felony case processings. Criminology, 24(4), 623-644.
3.
Albonetti, C.A. ( 1991). An integration of theories to explain judicial discretion . Social Problems, 38, 247-266.
4.
Albonetti, C.A. ( 1997). Sentencing under the federal sentencing guidelines: Effects of defendant characteristics, guilty pleas, and departures on sentence outcomes for drug offenses. Law and Society Review, 31(4), 789-822.
5.
Albonetti, C.A. ( 1998). The role of gender and departures in the sentencing of defendants convicted of a white-collar offense under the federal sentencing guidelines. In J. T. Ulmer (Ed.), Sociology of crime, law, and deviance (Vol. 1, pp. 3-48). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
6.
Allison, P.D. ( 1999). Comparing logit and probit coefficients across groups . Sociological Methods and Research, 28(2), 186-208.
7.
Andrews, D.W.K., & Fair, R.C. ( 1988). Inference in nonlinear econometric models with structural change. Review of Economic Studies, 55(4), 615-640.
8.
Barker, V. ( 2006). Deliberating crime and punishment: A way out of get tough justice? Criminology and Public Policy, 5(1), 37-44.
Berk, R.A. ( 1983). An introduction to sample selection bias in sociological data. American Sociological Review, 48, 386-398.
11.
Block, M.K. ( 1990). Congressional testimony: Statement of professor Michael K. Block. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 2(7), 221-223.
12.
Bogan, K.M. ( 1990). Constructing felony sentencing guidelines in an already crowded state: Oregon breaks new ground. Crime & Delinquency , 36(4), 467-487.
13.
Bottoms, A. ( 1995). The philosophy and politics of punishment and sentencing . In C. Clarkson & R. Morgan (Eds.), The politics of sentencing reform (pp. 17-49). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
14.
Brereton, D., & Casper, J. ( 1981-1982). Does it pay to plead guilty? Differential sentencing and the functioning of criminal courts. Law and Society Review, 16(1), 45-70.
15.
Breyer, S. ( 1988). The federal sentencing guidelines and the key compromises upon which they rest. Hofstra Law Review, 17(1), 1-50.
16.
Bridges, G., & Steen, S. ( 1998). Racial disparities in official assessments of juvenile offenders: Attributional stereotypes as mediating mechanisms. American Sociological Review, 63(4), 554-570.
17.
Bright, S.B., & Keenan, P.J. ( 1995). Judges and the politics of death: Deciding between the bill of rights and the next election in capital cases. Boston University Law Review, 75(3), 759-835.
18.
Bureau of Justice Assistance. (1998). 1996 national survey of state sentencing structures (No. 169270) . Washington, DC: Author.
19.
Bushway, S.D., Johnson, B.D., & Slocum, L.A. ( 2007). Is the magic still there? The use of the Heckman two-step correction for selection bias in criminology. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 23(2), 151-178.
20.
Chiricos, T. ( 1998). Media, moral panics and the politics of crime control . In G. F. Cole & M. G. Gertz (Eds.), Criminal justice system: Politics and policies (7th ed., pp. 58-75). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
21.
Chow, G.C. ( 1960). Tests of equality between sets of coefficients in two linear regressions. Econometrica, 28(3), 591-605.
22.
Cirillo, V.A. ( 1986). Windows for discretion in the Pennsylvania sentencing guidelines. Villanova Law Review, 31(5), 1309-1349.
23.
Clogg, C.C., Petkova, E., & Haritou, A. ( 1995). Statistical methods for comparing regression coefficients between models. American Journal of Sociology, 100, 1261-1293.
24.
Dailey, D.L. ( 1998). Minnesota sentencing guidelines: A structure for change . Law & Policy, 20(3), 311-332.
25.
D’Alessio, S.J., & Stolzenberg, L. (1995). The impact of sentencing guidelines on jail incarceration in Minnesota. Criminology , 33(2), 283.
26.
Demuth, S. ( 2003). Racial and ethnic differences in pretrial release decisions and outcomes: A comparison of Hispanic, Black, and White felony arrestees . Criminology, 41(3), 873-908.
27.
Dixon, J. ( 1995). The organizational context of criminal court sentencing . American Journal of Sociology, 100(5), 1157-1198.
28.
Dodge, L. ( 1990). Congressional oversight: US General Accounting Office statement. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 2(7), 210-214.
29.
Doob, A.N. ( 1995). The United States Sentencing Commission guidelines: If you don’t know where you are going, you might not get there. In C. Clarkson & R. Morgan (Eds.), The politics of sentencing reform (pp. 199-250). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.
30.
Dubin, J.A., & Rivers, D. ( 1989-1990). Selection bias in linear regression, logit and probit models. Sociological Methods and Research , 18(2-3), 360-390.
31.
Edwards, W., & Hensley, C. ( 2001). Restructuring sex offender sentencing: A therapeutic jurisprudence approach to the criminal justice process. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 46(6), 646-662.
32.
Engen, R.L., & Gainey, R.R. ( 2000a). Conceptualizing legally relevant factors under guidelines: A reply to Ulmer. Criminology, 38(4), 1245-1252.
33.
Engen, R.L., & Gainey, R.R. ( 2000b). Modeling the effects of legally relevant and extralegal factors under sentencing guidelines: The rules have changed. Criminology, 38(4), 1207-1230.
34.
Engen, R.L., Gainey, R.R., Crutchfield, R.D., & Weis, J.G. ( 2003). Discretion and disparity under sentencing guidelines: The role of departures and structured sentencing alternatives. Criminology, 41(1), 99-130.
35.
Farkas, M.A., & Stichman, A. ( 2002). Sex offender laws: Can treatment, punishment, incapacitation, and public safety be reconciled?Criminal Justice Review, 27(2), 256-283.
36.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1997). Uniform crime reports: 1996 (U.S. Department of Justice, Ed.). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office .
37.
Federal Bureau of Investigation. (1999). Uniform crime reports: 1998 (U.S. Department of Justice, Ed.). Washington, DC: Government Printing Office .
38.
Finn, M.T. ( 2002). The American bench: Judges of the nation. Sacramento, CA: Forster-Long.
39.
Frank, J., Stoddard, C., Engel, R.S., & Haas, S.M. ( 2006, November). Through the court’s eyes: A new look at focal concerns theory. Paper presented at the American Society of Criminology, Los Angeles.
40.
Frankel, M.E. ( 1973). Criminal sentences: Law without order. New York: Hill and Wang.
41.
Frase, R.S. ( 2005). State sentencing guidelines: Diversity, consensus and unresolved policy issues. Columbia Law Review, 105(4), 1190-1232.
42.
Gorton, J., & Boies, J.L. ( 1999). Sentencing guidelines and racial disparity across time: Pennsylvania prison sentences in 1977, 1983, 1992 and 1993. Social Science Quarterly, 80(1), 37-54.
43.
Greene, W.H. ( 2000). Econometric analysis (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall .
44.
Heckman, J.J. ( 1976). The common structure of statistical models of truncation, sample selection and limited dependent variables. Annals of Economic and Social Measurement, 5, 475-492.
45.
Hepburn, J.R. ( 1978). Race and the decision to arrest: An analysis of warrants issued. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency , 15, 54-73.
46.
Hofer, P.J., Loeffler, C., Blackwell, K., & Valentino, P. ( 2004). Fifteen years of guideline sentencing: An assessment of how well the federal criminal justice system is achieving the goals of sentencing reform. Washington, DC: U.S. Sentencing Commission.
47.
Hudson, K. ( 2005). Offending identities: Sex offenders’ perspectives on their treatment and management. London: Willan.
Jaccard, J. ( 2001). Interaction effects in logistic regression (Vol. 135) . Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE .
50.
Jaccard, J., Turrisi, R., & Wan, C.K. ( 1990). Interaction effects in multiple regression (Vol. 72) . Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
51.
Johnson, B.D. ( 2003). Racial and ethnic disparities in sentencing departures across modes of conviction. Criminology, 41(2), 449-490.
52.
Johnson, B.D. ( 2006). Multilevel context of criminal sentencing: Integrating judge- and county-level influences. Criminology, 44(2), 259-298.
53.
Karstedt, S. ( 2002). Emotions and criminal justice. Theoretical Criminology, 6(3), 299-317.
54.
Kautt, P. ( 2002). Location, location, location: Interdistrict and intercircuit variation in sentencing outcomes for federal drug-trafficking offenses. Justice Quarterly, 19(4), 633-671.
55.
Kautt, P.M., & DeLone, M.A. (2006). Sentencing outcomes under competing but coexisting sentencing interventions: Untying the Gordian knot . Criminal Justice Review, 31(2), 105-131.
56.
Kingsnorth, R., Lopez, J., Wentworth, J., & Cummings, D. ( 1998). Adult sexual assault: The role of racial/ethnic composition in prosecution and sentencing. Journal of Criminal Justice , 26(5), 359-371.
57.
Kirkpatrick, L.C. ( 1992). Mandatory felony sentencing guidelines: The Oregon model . University of California, Davis Law Review, 25(3), 695-714.
58.
Kramer, J.H., & Lubitz, R.L. ( 1985). Pennsylvania’s sentencing reform: The impact of commission established guidelines. Crime & Delinquency , 31(4), 481-500.
59.
Kramer, J.H., Lubitz, R.L., & Kempinen, C.A. (1989). Sentencing guidelines: A quantitative comparison of sentencing policies in Minnesota, Washington, and Pennsylvania. Justice Quarterly, 6(4), 565-587.
60.
Kramer, J.H., & Ulmer, J.T. ( 1996). Sentencing disparity and departures from guidelines . Justice Quarterly, 13(1), 81-106.
61.
Kramer, J.H., & Ulmer, J.T. ( 2002). Downward departures for serious violent offenders: Local court "corrections" to Pennsylvania’s sentencing guidelines. Criminology, 40(4), 897-932.
62.
LaFave, W.R. ( 1965). Arrest: The decision to take a suspect into custody . Boston: Little, Brown.
63.
La Fond, J.Q. ( 2005). Preventing sexual violence: How society should cope with sex offenders. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
64.
Lewis-Beck, M.S. ( 1980). Applied regression: An introduction (Vol. 22) . Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
65.
Liao, T.F. ( 1994). Interpreting probability models: Logit, probit, and other generalized linear models (Vol. 101). Thousand Oaks, CA : SAGE.
66.
Lieb, R., Quinsey, V., & Berliner, L. ( 1998). Sexual predators and social policy. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of research (Vol. 23, pp. 43-114). Chicago : University of Chicago Press.
67.
Lösel, F., & Schmucker, M. ( 2005). The effectiveness of treatment for sexual offenders: A comprehensive meta-analysis. Journal of Experimental Criminology , 1(1), 117-146.
68.
Lubitz, R.L., & Ross, T.W. ( 2001, June). Sentencing guidelines: Reflections on the future. Sentencing and Corrections: Issues for the 21st Century, 10, 1-6.
69.
Martin, S.E. ( 1984). Interests and politics in sentencing reform: The development of sentencing guidelines in Minnesota and Pennsylvania. Villanova Law Review, 29, 21-113.
70.
Marvell, T.B. ( 1995). Sentencing guidelines and prison population growth . Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 85(3), 696-709.
71.
Maxwell, C.D., Robinson, A.L., & Post, L.A. ( 2003). The impact of race on the adjudication of sexual assault and other crimes. Journal of Criminal Justice, 31, 523-538.
72.
Meier, R.F., & Geis, G. ( 1997). Victimless crime? Prostitution, drugs, homosexuality, and abortion. Los Angeles: Roxbury .
73.
Merritt, N., Fain, T., & Turner, S. ( 2004). Oregon’s Measure 11 sentencing reform: Implementation and system impact. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, RAND.
74.
Merritt, N., Fain, T., & Turner, S. ( 2006). Oregon’s get tough sentencing reform: A lesson in justice system adaptation. Criminology and Public Policy , 5(1), 5-36.
75.
Miethe, T. ( 1987). Charging and plea-bargaining under determinate sentencing: The hydraulic displacement of discretion. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 78(1), 155-176.
76.
Miethe, T.D., & Moore, C.A. ( 1985). Socioeconomic disparities under determinate sentencing systems: A comparison of pre-guideline and post-guideline practices in Minnesota . Criminology, 23(2), 337-363.
77.
Miethe, T.D., Olson, J., & Mitchell, O. ( 2006). Specialization and persistence in the arrest histories of sex offenders: A comparative analysis of alternative measures and offense types. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 43(3), 204-229.
78.
Muhlhausen, D.B. ( 2004). The determinants of sentencing in Pennsylvania: Do the characteristics of judges matter?Washington, DC : Heritage Foundation.
79.
Nagel, I.H. ( 1990). Structuring sentencing discretion: The new federal sentencing guidelines. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology , 80(4), 883-943.
80.
Palermo, G.B., & Farkas, M.A. ( 2001). The dilemma of the sexual offender. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
Petrosino, A.J., & Petrosino, C. ( 1999). The public safety potential of Megan’s law in Massachusetts: An assessment from a sample of criminal sexual psychopaths . Crime & Delinquency, 45(1), 140-158.
83.
Petrunik, M.G. ( 2002). Managing unacceptable risk: Sex offenders, community response, and social policy in the United States and Canada. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 46(4), 483-511.
84.
Pratt, T.C., & Godsey, T.W. ( 2006). Social support, inequality and homicide: A cross-national test of an integrated theoretical model. Criminology, 41(3), 611-644.
85.
Raudenbush, S.W., & Bryk, A.S. ( 2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods (2nd ed., Vol. 1). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
86.
Ruddell, R. ( 2005). Social disruption, state priorities, and minority threat: A cross-national study of imprisonment. Punishment & Society: The International Journal of Penology, 7(1), 7-28.
87.
Schlesinger, T. ( 2005). Racial and ethnic disparity in pretrial criminal processing . Justice Quarterly, 22(2), 170-192.
88.
Selvog, H.H. ( 2001). Social state to penal state-Moral panic and sex offenders . Justice Policy Journal, 1(1), 72-93.
89.
Sentencing Commission Working Group. (2008 ). A structured sentencing framework and sentencing commission . London: Author.
90.
Siegel, S., & Castellan, N.J. (1988). Nonparametric statistics for the behavioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.
91.
Simester, A.P., & Simester, D.I. (1990). Analyzing sexual offense sentences: An empirical approach. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 23(4), 269-283.
92.
Spears, J.W., & Spohn, C. ( 1997). The effect of evidence factors and victim characteristics on prosecutors’ charging decisions in sexual assault cases. Justice Quarterly, 14(3), 501-524.
93.
Spohn, C., & Holleran, D. ( 2000). The imprisonment penalty paid by young, unemployed Black and Hispanic male offenders. Criminology, 38(1), 281-306.
94.
Spohn, C., & Horney, J. ( 1993). Rape law reform and the effect of victim characteristics on case processing. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 9(4), 383-409.
95.
Steffensmeier, D., & Demuth, S. ( 2000). Ethnicity and sentencing outcomes in U.S. federal courts: Who is punished more harshly? American Sociological Review , 65(5), 705-729.
96.
Steffensmeier, D., & Demuth, S. ( 2001). Ethnicity and judges’ sentencing decisions: Hispanic-Black-White comparisons. Criminology, 39(1), 145-178.
97.
Steffensmeier, D., Kramer, J., & Striefel, C. ( 1993). Gender and imprisonment decisions. Criminology , 31(3), 411-446.
98.
Steffensmeier, D., Kramer, J., & Ulmer, J. ( 1995). Age differences in sentencing. Justice Quarterly, 12(3), 583-601.
99.
Steffensmeier, D., Ulmer, J., & Kramer, J. ( 1998). The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, Black, and male. Criminology, 36(4), 763-798.
100.
Stolzenberg, R.M., & Relles, D.A. ( 1997). Tools for intuition about sample selection bias and its correction. American Sociological Review, 62, 494-507.
101.
Tobin, J. ( 1958). Estimation of relationships for limited dependent variables . Econometrica, 26, 24-36.
102.
Tonry, M.H. ( 1987). Sentencing reform impacts. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
103.
Tonry, M. ( 1995). Malign neglect. New York: Oxford University Press.
104.
Tonry, M. ( 1996). Sentencing matters. New York : Oxford University Press.
105.
Tonry, M. ( 2006). Criminology, mandatory minimums and public policy . Criminology and Public Policy, 5(1), 45-56.
106.
Tonry, M., & Hatlestad, K. (Eds.). (1997). Sentencing reform in overcrowded times: A comparative perspective. New York: Oxford University Press.
107.
Truitt, L., Rhodes, W.M., Kling, R.N., & McMullen, Q.E. (2001). Multi-site evaluation of sentencing guidelines: Florida and North Carolina. Rockville, MD: National Criminal Justice Reference Service.
108.
Ulmer, J.T. ( 1997). Social worlds of sentencing: Court communities under sentencing guidelines. Albany: State University of New York Press.
109.
Ulmer, J.T. ( 2000). The rules have changed-So proceed with caution: A comment on Engen and Gainey’s method for modeling sentencing outcomes under guidelines. Criminology, 38(4), 1231-1243.
110.
Ulmer, J.T., & Bradley, M.S. ( 2006). Variation in trial penalties among serious violent offenses . Criminology, 44(3), 631-670.
111.
Ulmer, J.T., & Johnson, B. ( 2004). Sentencing in context: A multilevel analysis. Criminology, 42(1), 137-177.
112.
Ulmer, J.T., & Kramer, J.H. ( 1996). Court communities under sentencing guidelines: Dilemmas of formal rationality. Criminology, 34(3), 383-408.
113.
Ulmer, J.T., & Kramer, J.H. ( 1998). The use and transformation of formal decision-making criteria: Sentencing guidelines, organizational contexts and case processing strategies. Social Problems, 45(2), 248-267.
114.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2002a). Oregon 2000: Census 2000 profile. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
115.
U.S. Census Bureau. (2002b). Pennsylvania 2000: Census 2000 profile. Washington, DC : U.S. Department of Commerce.
116.
von Hirsch, A. ( 1988). Federal sentencing guidelines: The United States and Canadian schemes compared. New York: New York University, School of Law, Center for Research in Crime and Justice .
117.
von Hirsch, A. ( 1995). Proportionality and parsimony in American sentencing guidelines: The Minnesota and Oregon standards. In C. Clarkson & R. Morgan (Eds.), Politics of sentencing reform (pp. 149-168). Oxford, UK : Oxford University Press.
118.
von Hirsch, A., & Greene, J. ( 1993). When should reformers support creation of sentencing guidelines?Wake Forest Law Review, 28, 329-343.
119.
von Hirsch, A., Tonry, M., & Knapp, K.A. ( 1987). The sentencing commission and its guidelines. Boston: Northeastern University Press .
120.
Winslow, R., & Zhang, S. ( 2008). Criminology: A global perspective. New York: Prentice Hall.
121.
Wooldredge, J., & Griffin, T. ( 2005). Displaced discretion under Ohio sentencing guidelines . Journal of Criminal Justice, 33(4), 301-316.
