Despite sentencing reforms over the last few decades, many states failed to introduce guidelines, including South Carolina. The present article uses data collected from the now disbanded South Carolina Sentencing Commission (1982 to 2003) in order to assess the influence of gender, age, race, and type of crime. We found that females were consistently sentenced more leniently than were similarly situated males. Interactions between gender and the other variables, however, failed to gain significance with the exception of gender and offense type for the sentence length decision. Interestingly, we found a significant interaction between gender and offense severity level for both sentencing outcomes and criminal history for the incarceration decision. We discuss the implications of these findings in the event that South Carolina would have adopted sentencing guidelines.
AlbonettiC. A. (1991). An integration of theories to explain judicial discretion. Social Problems, 38, 247-266.
2.
AlbonettiC. A. (2012). Women, law, and the legal system. In JensenV. (Ed.), Women criminals (pp. 209-239). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO.
3.
ArmstrongG. (1977). Females under the law-“protected” but unequal. Crime & Delinquency, 23, 109-120.
4.
BarnesJ. C.MillerH. V.MillerJ. M. (2009). Indentifying leading characteristics associated with juvenile drug court admission and success: A research note. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 7, 350-360.
5.
BaserO. (2007). Modeling transformed health care cost with unknown heteroskedasticity. Applied Economics Research, 1,1-6.
6.
BelknapJ. (2007). The invisible woman: Gender, crime, and justice (3rd ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth Publishing Company.
7.
BerkR. A.RayS. C. (1982). Selection biases in sociological data. Social Science Research, 11, 352-398.
8.
BickleG. S.PetersonR. D. (1991). The impact of gender-based family roles on criminal sentencing. Social Problems, 38, 372-394.
9.
BloomB.OwenB.CovingtonS. (2004). Women offenders and the gendered effects of public policy. Review of Policy Research, 21(1), 31-48.
10.
BoritchH. (1992). Gender and criminal court outcomes: An historical analysis. Criminology, 30, 293-326.
11.
BrennanP. K. (2006). Sentencing female misdemeanants: An examination of the direct and indirect effects of race/ethnicity. Justice Quarterly, 23(1), 60-91.
12.
BrennanP. K.SpohnC. (2008). Race/ethnicity and sentencing outcomes among drug offenders in North Carolina. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 24, 371-398.
13.
BrittonD. M. (2011). The gender of crime. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.
14.
BushwayS. D.PiehlA. M. (2001). Judging judicial discretion: Legal factors and racial discrimination in sentencing. Law & Society Review, 35, 733-764.
15.
BushwayS. D.PiehlA. M. (2007). The inextricable link between age and criminal history in sentencing. Crime & Delinquency, 53, 156-183.
16.
BushwayS. D.JohnsonB.SlocumL. (2007). Is the magic still there? The use of the heckman two-step correction for selection bias in criminology. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 23,151-178.
17.
ChampionD. J. (1987). Elderly felons and sentencing severity: Interregional variations in leniency and sentencing trends. Criminal Justice Review, 12(2), 7-14.
18.
Chesney-LindM.PollockJ. M. (1995). Women’s prisons: Equality with a vengeance. In MerloA. V.PollockJ. M. (eds.), Women, law, & social contol. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
19.
CrewK. B. (1991). Sex differences in criminal sentencing: Chivalry or patriarchy?Justice Quarterly, 8, 59-83.
20.
DalyK. (1987). Structure and practice of familial-based justice in a criminal court. Law & Society Review, 21, 267-290.
21.
DalyK.BordtR. L. (1995). Sex effects and sentencing: An analysis of the statistical literature. Justice Quarterly, 12, 141-175.
22.
DalyK.TonryM. (1997). Gender, race, and sentencing. In TonryM. (Ed.), Crime and justice: A review of the literature (Vol. 22). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
23.
DoernerJ. K.DemuthS. (2010). The independent and joint effects of race/ethnicity, gender, and age on sentencing outcomes in U.S. Federal Courts. Justice Quarterly, 27, 1-27.
24.
DowW. H.NortonE. C. (2003). Choosing between and interpreting the heckit and two-part models for corner solutions. Health Services & Outcomes Research Methodology, 4(1), 5-18.
25.
DuanN. (1983). Smearing estimate: A nonparametric retransformation method. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 78, 605-610.
26.
DuanN.ManningW. G.MorrisC. N.NewhouseJ. P. (1984). Choosing between the sample-selection model and the multi-part model. Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, 2, 282-289.
27.
EdwardsA. R. (1989). Sex/gender, sexism and criminal justice: Some theoretical considerations. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 17, 165-184.
28.
EmbryR.LyonsP. M. (2012). Sex-based sentencing: Sentencing discrepancies between male and female sex offenders. Feminist Criminology, 7(2), 146-162.
29.
EngenR. L.GaineyR. R. (2000). Modeling the effects of legally relevant and extralegal factors under sentencing guidelines: The rules have changed. Criminology, 38, 1207-1229.
30.
FarnworthM.TeskeR.H. (1995). Gender differences in felony court processing: Three hypotheses of disparity. Women & Criminal Justice, 6(2), 23-44.
31.
FranklinC. A.FearnN. E. (2008). Gender, race, and formal court decision-making outcomes: Chivalry/paternalism, conflict theory or gender conflict. Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 279-290.
32.
FreiburgerT. L. (2010). The effects of gender, family status, and race on sentencing decisions. Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 28, 378-395.
33.
GertnerN. (2002). Women offenders and the sentencing guidelines. Yale Journal of Law and Feminism, 14, 291-305.
34.
GoverA. R.MacDonaldJ. M.AlpertG. P. (2003). Combating domestic violence: Findings from an evaluation of a local domestic violence court. Criminology & Public Policy, 3(1), 109-132.
35.
GriffinT.WooldredgeJ. (2006). Sex-based disparities in felony dispositions before versus after sentencing reform in Ohio. Criminology, 44, 893-923.
36.
HarperR. L.HarperG. C.StockdaleJ. E. (2002). The role and sentencing of women in drug trafficking crime. Legal and Criminological Psychology, 7(1), 101-114.
37.
HartleyR. D.KwakD.ParkM.LeeM. (2011). Exploring sex disparity in sentencing outcomes: A focus on narcotics offenders in South Korea. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 55, 268-286.
38.
HartleyR. D.MaddenS.SpohnC. C. (2007). Prosecutorial discretion: An examination of substantial assistance departures in federal crack-cocaine and power-cocaine cases. Justice Quarterly, 24, 382- 407.
39.
JohnsonP. C. (1995). At the intersection of injustice: Experiences of African American women in crime and sentencing. American University Journal of Gender & Law, 4(1), 1-76.
40.
KamC. D.FranzeseR. J. (2007). Modeling and interpreting interactive hypotheses in regression analysis. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
41.
KauderN. B.OstromB. J. (2008). State sentencing guidelines: Profiles and continuum. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts.
42.
KauttP. M. (2009). Is the offense seriousness axis free of extralegal influence? Assessing the predictors of a “legally relevant” guideline criterion. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 34, 253-273.
43.
KennedyP. (2008). A guide to econometrics. 6th ed.Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
44.
KlepperS.NaginD.TierneyL. J. (1983). Discrimination in the criminal justice system: A critical appraisal of the literature. In BlumsteinA.CohenJ.MartinS. E.TonryM. H.(Eds.), Research on sentencing: The search for reform, vol. 2. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
45.
Koons-WittB. A. (2002). The effect of gender on the decision to incarcerate before and after the introduction of sentencing guidelines. Criminology, 40, 297-328.
46.
KramerJ .H.UlmerJ. T. (2009). Sentencing guidelines: Lessons from Pennsylvania. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publications.
47.
KruttschnittC. (1980). Social status and sentences of female offenders. Law & Society Review, 15, 247-265.
48.
KruttschnittC. (1982). Respectable women and the law. The Sociological Quarterly, 23, 221-234.
49.
KruttschnittC. (1984). Sex and criminal court dispositions: The unresolved controversy. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 21, 213-232.
50.
LeungS. F.YuS. (1996). On the choice between sample selection and two-part models. Journal of Econometrics, 72, 197-229.
51.
MaddenD. (2008). Sample selection versus two-part models revisited: The case of female smoking and drinking. Journal of Health Economics, 27, 300-307.
52.
MarvellT. (1995). Sentencing guidelines and prison population growth. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 85, 696-709.
53.
MarvellT.MoodyC. (1996). Determinate sentencing and abolishing parole: The long-term impacts on prisons and crime. Criminology, 34, 107-128.
54.
MillerJ. (1998). Up it up: Gender and the accomplishment of street robbery. Criminology, 36(1), 37-66.
55.
MillerJ. M.ShuttJ. E. (2001). Considering the need for empirically grounded drug court screening mechanisms. Journal of Drug Issues, 31(1), 91-106.
56.
MouldsE. F. (1980). Chivalry and paternalism: Disparities of treatment in the criminal justice system. In DatesmanS. K.ScarpittiF. R. (eds.), Women, crime, and justice. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
57.
MustardD. (2001). Racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in sentencing: Evidence from the U.S. Federal Courts. Journal of Law & Economics, 44, 285-314.
58.
NagelI. H.JohnsonB. L. (1994). The role of gender in a structured sentencing system: Equal treatment, policy choices, and the sentencing of female offenders under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 85, 181-221.
59.
NortonE. C.DowW. H.DoY. K. (2008). Specification tests for the sample selection and two-part models. Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology, 8, 201-208.
60.
PaternosterR. (1983). Race of victim and location of crime: The decision to seek the death penalty in Sout Carolina. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 74, 754-785.
61.
PaternosterR. (1984). Prosecutorial discretion in requesting the death penalty: A case of vitim-based racial discrimination. Law and Society Review, 18, 437-478.
62.
PaternosterR.KazyakaA. M. (1988). Administration of the death penalty in South Carolina: Experiences over the first few years. South Carolina Law Review, 39, 245-414.
63.
PierceM. B.FreiburgerT. L. (2011). Assessing the influence of familial paternalism on child neglect sentencing decisions. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 36, 421-433.
64.
RaederM. S. (1993). Gender and sentencing: Single moms, battered women, and other sex-based anomalies in the gender-free world of the federal sentencing guidelines. Pepperdine Law Review, 20, 905-990.
65.
RafterN. (1990). Pretrial justice: Women, prisons, and social control. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
66.
RodriguezS. F.CurryT. R.LeeG. (2006). Gender differences in criminal sentencing: Do effects vary across violent, property, and drug offenses?Social Science Quarterly, 87, 318-339.
67.
SongerM. J.UnahI. (2006). The effect of race, gender, and location on prosecutorial decisions to seek the death penalty in South Carolina. South Carolina Law Review, 58, 161-210.
68.
South Carolina Sentencing Guidelines Commission. (n.d.). History, crime classification, truth in sentencing, and sentencing guidelines. South Carolina Department of Archives and History.
69.
South Carolina Sentencing Guidelines Commission. (2002). Truth in sentencing/advisory sentencing guidelines and criminal justice plan.
70.
SpohnC. (1999). Gender and sentencing of drug offenders: Is chivalry dead?Criminal Justice Policy Review, 9, 365-399.
71.
SpohnC. (2000). Thirty years of sentencing reform: The quest for a racially neutral sentencing process. In Policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system (pp. 427-501). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
72.
SpohnC.BeichnerD. (2000). Is preferential treatment of female offenders a thing of the past? A multisite study of gender, race, and imprisonment. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 11(2), 149-184.
73.
SpohnC.HolleranD. (2000). The imprisonment penalty paid by young, unemployed Black and Hispanic male offenders. Criminology, 38, 281-306.
74.
SpohnC.SpearsJ. (1997). Gender and case processing decisions: A comparison of case outcomes for male and female defendants charged with violent felonies. Women & Criminal Justice, 8(3), 29-58.
75.
SpohnC.WelchS.GruhlJ. (1985). Women defendants in court: The interaction between sex and race in convicting and sentencing. Social Science Quarterly, 66, 178-185.
76.
SteffensmeierD.DemuthS. (2006). Does gender modify the effects of race-ethnicity on criminal sanctioning? Sentences for male and female White, Black, and Hispanic defendants. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22, 241-261.
77.
SteffensmeierD.KramerJ.StreifelC. (1993). Gender and imprisonment decisions. Criminology, 31, 411-446.
78.
SteffensmeierD.KramerJ.UlmerJ. (1995). Age differences in sentencing. Justice Quarterly, 12, 583-602.
79.
SteffensmeierD.MotivansM. (2000). Older men and older women in the arms of the law: Offending patterns and sentencing outcomes. Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences, 55(3), 141-151
80.
SteffensmeierD.UlmerJ. T.KramerJ. (1998). The interaction of race, gender, and age in criminal sentencing: The punishment cost of being young, black, and male. Criminology, 36, 763-798.
81.
StolzenbergR. M.RellesD. A. (1997). Tools for intuition about sample selection bias and its correction. American Sociological Review, 62, 494-507.
82.
UlmerJ. 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, 1231-1243.
83.
UlmerJ. T.KramerJ. H. (1996). Court communities under sentencing guidelines: Dilemmas of formal rationality and sentencing disparity. Criminology, 34, 383-407.
84.
WarrenP.ChiricosT.BalesW. (2012). The imprisonment penalty for young Black and Hispanic males: A crime-specific analysis. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 49(1), 56-80.
85.
WooldridgeJ. M. (2010). Econometric analysis of cross section and panel data. 2nd ed.Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
86.
WuJ.SpohnC. (2009). Does an offender’s age have an effect on sentence length? A meta-analytic review. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 20, 379-413.
87.
YoungV. D. (1986). Differential sentencing of women and men in the U.S.A. International Journal of the Sociology of Law, 12, 401-413.
88.
ZatzM. S. (2000). The convergence of race, ethnicity, gender, and class on court decisionmaking: Looking toward the 21st century. Policies, processes, and decisions of the criminal justice system, vol. 3. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice (NCJ Number 185536).
