Felony sentencing is a state public policy outcome lying at the end of a long chain of decisions by legislatures, bureaucracies, and courts. Using data from the 1986 National Judicial Reporting Program study of 32 states, the authors discovered that felony sentences for rape, assault, and robbery were linked to the Erikson, McIver, and Wright index of state conservatism (1987), whereas those for homicide and property crimes were not correlated with ideology. The addition of resource variables such as tax capacity and prison capacity was found not to alter these findings. These results make sense, given the intense public antipathy to crimes against persons; the exception for murder may derive from the fact that a uniform abhorrence of murderers subdues the effect of liberal and conservative ideologies. Therefore, the preferences of the public seem to weigh heavily in the sentencing of violent offenders (other than murderers) but have much less if any effect on the fate of other criminals.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aronson, R. J.
, & Hilley, J. L. (1986). Financing state and local government. Washington, DC: Brookings Institute.
2.
Austin, T. L.
(1981). The influence of court location on type of criminal sentence: The rural-urban factor. Journal of Criminal Justice, 9, 305-316.
3.
Bureau of Justice Statistics, United States Department of Justice
. (1990). Special report: Felony case processing in state courts, 1986. Washington, DC: United States Department of Justice.
4.
Cook, B. B.
(1977). Public opinion and federal judicial policy. American Journal of Political Science, 21, 567-600.
5.
Cox, G.
(1984). Values, culture, and prison policy. Prison Journal, 64, 5-15.
6.
Dawson, R. E.
, & Robinson, J. A. (1963). Inter-party competition, economic variables, and welfare policies in the American states. Journal of Politics, 25, 265-289.
7.
Dye, T. R.
(1966). Politics, economics, and the public. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
8.
Eisenstein, J.
, & Jacob, H. (1977). Felony justice: An organizational analysis of criminal courts. Boston, MA: Little, Brown.
9.
Elazar, D.
(1972). American federalism: A view from the states (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Crowell.
10.
Erikson, R.
(1978). The relationship between public opinion and state policy: A new look based on some forgotten data. American Journal of Political Science, 20, 25-38.
11.
Finn, P.
(1984). Judicial responses to prison crowding. Judicature, 67, 319-325.
12.
Gottschall, J.
(1983). Carter's judicial appointments: The influence of affirmative action and merit selection on voting on the U.S. Court of Appeals. Judicature, 67, 165-173.
13.
Gruhl, J.
, Welch, S., & Spohn, C. (1981). Women as policy makers: The case of trial judges. American Journal of Political Science, 25, 308-322.
14.
Hagan, J.
(1977). Criminal justice in rural and urban communities: A study of the bureaucratization of justice. Social Forces, 55, 597-612.
15.
Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research
. (1991). Codebook for study number 9073. Ann Arbor, MI: Author.
16.
King, A.
(1973). Ideas, institutions and the policies of governments: A comparative analysis. British Journal of Political Science, 3, 291-313 and 409-423.
17.
Kritzer, H.
(1979a). Federal judges and their political environments: The influence of public opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 23, 194-205.
18.
Kritzer, H.
(1979b). Political culture, trial courts and criminal cases. In P. Nardulli (Ed.), The study of criminal courts: Political perspectives (pp. 131-169). Cambridge, MA: Ballinger.
19.
Levin, M.
(1977). Urban politics and the criminal courts. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
20.
Logan, W.
, Stellwagen, L. A., & Langan, P. A. (1987). Felony laws of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
21.
Lowery, D.
(1987). The distribution of tax burdens in the American states. Western Political Quarterly, 40, 137-158.
22.
Myers, M.
(1988). Social background and the sentencing behavior of judges. Criminology, 26, 649-675.
23.
Myers, M.
, & Talarico, S. (1986). Urban justice, rural injustice? Urbanization and its effect on sentencing. Criminology, 24, 367-391.
24.
Myers, M.
, & Talarico, S. (1987). The social context of criminal sentencing. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
25.
Nardulli, P.
, Fleming, R., & Eisenstein, J. (1984). Unraveling the complexities of decision making in face-to-face groups: A contextual analysis of plea-bargained sentences. American Political Science Review, 78, 912-928.
26.
Nice, D.
(1983). Representation in the states: Policymaking and ideology. Social Science Quarterly, 64, 404-411.
27.
Pierce, N.
, & Hagstrom, J. (1983). The book of America: Inside the 50 states today. New York, NY: Norton.
28.
Plotnick, R.
, & Winters, R. (1985). A politico-economic theory of income redistribution. American Political Science Review, 79, 458-473.
29.
Skogan, W.
(1990). Crime and punishment. In V. Gray, H. Jacob, & R. B. Albritton (Eds.), Politics in the American states. Glenview, IL: Little, Brown.
30.
Stumpf, H.
(1988). American judicial politics. San Diego, CA: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.
31.
Uslaner, E.
(1978). Comparative state policy formation, interparty competition and malapportionment: A new look at V. O. Key's hypothesis. Journal of Politics, 40, 409-432.
32.
Walker, T.
, & Barrow, D. (1985). The diversification of the federal bench: Policy and process ramifications. Journal of Politics, 47, 596-616.
33.
Welch, S.
, Gruhl, J., & Spohn, C. (1988). Do black judges make a difference?American Journal of Political Science, 32, 126-136.
34.
Wright, G.
, Erikson, R., & McIver, J. (1987). Public opinion and policy liberalism in the American states. American Journal of Political Science, 31, 980-1001.
