Race and Plea Bargained Outcomes: A Research Note

Humphrey, John A.; Fogarty, Timothy J.

doi:10.2307/2578906

Cited by 26 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…If this selection mechanism is random, then it is ignorable. However, numerous studies show that there are biases in criminal behavior, arrests, and convictions that make some people who commit crimes more likely to be convicted than others (Thomson & Zingraff 1981;Klepper et al 1983;Humphrey & Fogarty 1987;Bridges & Crutchfield 1988;Gordon et al 1988;Albonetti 1997;Spohn et al 1998;Brock et al 2000;Steffensmeier & Demuth 2000;Bushway & Piehl 2001;Lundman & Kaufman 2003;Rodriguez 2003;Weinstein 2003;Smith & Durose 2006). 5 However, vote validation is a complex process and depends on the quality of voting records and the procedure by which records are linked.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Turnout and Party Registration among Criminal Offenders in the 2008 General Election

Burch¹

2011

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper estimates the voter registration, turnout, and party registration in the 2008 general election for men with felony convictions in Florida, Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, and North Carolina. The findings indicate that turnout among felons is much lower than previous research has shown. Ex-felon turnout in 2008 varied by state, averaging 22.2 percent. People captured and convicted for their first offense after the election voted at similarly low rates. Also contrary to the expectations of previous literature, the ex-felon population does not seem overwhelmingly Democratic. In North Carolina and Florida, two states for which the data are available, party registration varies by race. Among registered black male ex-felons, 71.7 percent in North Carolina and 84.2 percent in Florida are registered Democrats. Among whites, however, only 35.3 percent and 36.4 percent of ex-felons are registered Democrats in North Carolina and Florida, respectively.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Turnout and Party Registration among Criminal Offenders in the 2008 General Election

Burch¹

2011

Law Soc Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Sentence disparity might be the result of differentiated treatment by the police, prosecutors (Humphrey & Fogarty 1987), probation officers (Bridges & Steen 1998;Ben-Zion & Palmor 1985), defense attorneys, and other participants. In fact, it is likely that prosecutors have a more direct impact on racial disparities than do judges (Humphrey & Fogarty 1987;Davis 1998). Their sentencing recommendations have a substantial impact (Englich & Mussweiler 2001;Englich et al 2005;Kremnitzer & Hassin 1993) but, even more importantly, prosecutors have direct control over the outcome through plea bargaining, which is the method of disposition in the vast majority of cases.…”

Section: Ethnic In-group Bias In Judicial Decisionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Let My People Go: Ethnic In‐Group Bias in Judicial Decisions—Evidence from a Randomized Natural Experiment

Gazal‐Ayal

Sulitzeanu‐Kenan

2010

J Empirical Legal Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does ethnic identity affect judicial decisions? We provide new evidence on ethnic biases in judicial behavior, by examining the decisions of Arab and Jewish judges in first bail hearings of Arab and Jewish suspects in Israeli courts. Our setting avoids the potential bias from unobservable case characteristics by exploiting the random assignment of judges to cases during weekends, and by focusing on the difference in ethnic disparity between Arab and Jewish judges. The study concentrates on the early-stage decisions in the judicial criminal process, controlling for the state's position, and excluding agreements, thereby allowing us to distinguish judicial bias from other sources of ethnic disparities. We find systematic evidence of in-group (same ethnic group) bias in detention decisions. However, in cases where the decision is to detain, no ethnic bias was found in the length of the detention. Possible interpretations and implications of these findings are discussed.

show abstract

“…Some recent findings even suggest that the disadvantages attributed to minority races may be underestimated for some offender categories (Miethe and Moore 1986). Dannefer and Schutt (1982) and others (Peterson and Hagan 1984;Myers and Talarico 1986b;Humphrey and Fogarty 1987;Myers 1987;Bridges, Crutchfield, and Simpson 1987;Bridges and Crutchfield 1988), however, move the argument to another level. They argue researchers should not expect race bias to be either ever-present or uniform across legal jurisdictions.…”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evidence shows race differentials in the administration of justice (1) at some decision points (Lizotte 1978;Bortner 1982;Bortner and Reed 1985;Frazier, Bock, and Henretta 1983;Bishop and Frazier 1988); (2) in some places, circumstances, and times (Unnever, Frazier, and Henretta 1980;Peterson and Hagan 1984;Humphrey and Fogarty 1987); and (3) for some types of offenders (Swigert and Farrell 1977;Farnworth and Horan 1980;Thompson and Zingraff 1981;Zatz 1984). Some recent findings even suggest that the disadvantages attributed to minority races may be underestimated for some offender categories (Miethe and Moore 1986).…”

Section: Previous Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Social Context of Race Differentials in Juvenile Justice Dispositions

Frazier

Bishop

Henretta

1992

The Sociological Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Proponents of traditional conflict theory have argued that minority races receive harsher justice system dispositions because they lack the power and resources to ensure equal treatment. Hawkins’ (1987) proposed revision of this model predicts minoritv races will receive harsher dispositions in social contexts in which their power threatens the dominant group's hegemony. This study uses juvenile justice processing data from the 32 Florida SMA counties to examine these competing models. The effects of three measures of blacks’ power are considered—the relative size of black and white population, the proportion of blacks who are poor, and the average black/white income gap—on differential treatment of black and white juveniles at three court processing stages. A higher proportion of whites in the population is associated with harsher dispositions for black youths. This result is consistent with traditional conflict theory. The other two measures have no differential racial effect on disposition severity.

show abstract

Race and Plea Bargained Outcomes: A Research Note

Cited by 26 publications

References 0 publications

Turnout and Party Registration among Criminal Offenders in the 2008 General Election

Turnout and Party Registration among Criminal Offenders in the 2008 General Election

Let My People Go: Ethnic In‐Group Bias in Judicial Decisions—Evidence from a Randomized Natural Experiment

The Social Context of Race Differentials in Juvenile Justice Dispositions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About