Racial Identity, Length of Incarceration, and Parole Decision Making

Abstract

Previous research has disclosed significant differences in the severity of sentences imposed on black and white offenders. This study investigated racial differences in black-white sentence patterns at the final stage of the criminal justice process, focusing on the actual amount of time served and the frequency of parole in a sample of 958 youthful offenders from a cohort of 1,345 consecutive admissions to a federal correctional institution.No racial differences were found in the actual amount of time served, but a significantly higher percentage of whites than blacks were granted parole. Blacks who were granted parole served a smaller portion of their sentences than did whites who were granted parole, but nonparoled blacks served a greater portion than did nonparoled whites. Discriminant function analysis did not show race to be significantly associated with decision to grant parole; instead, the primary factor was the entry sentence, with offenders sentenced to relatively short terms (less than eighteen months) being paroled less frequently than those with longer terms. Since blacks were more likely to have the shorter sentences, the racial difference in percentage granted parole was partly attributable to the severity of the sentence imposed originally.Examination of thirteen offender variables reflecting personal and social history, legal factors, and institutional adjustment measures revealed significant differences between paroled and nonparoled inmates but not between racial groups. Further discriminant analysis of factors associated with parole within black and white subsamples indicated that, of the thirteen variables

People With an Intellectual Disability in the Prisons

“…At this point in the sentencing process, first-time offenders with an intellectual disability are treated differently from other offenders, that is, significantly more custodial non-parole sentences are given by the courts than those given to nondisabled offenders. Previous research has shown that two factors have a dominant influence on the decision to deny parole at sentencing: the charge that led to the incarceration, including the issues of public safety and the public's reaction to it (Elion & Megaree, 1979), and the related concept of dangerousness (Scott, 1977). The fact that people with an intellectual disability in this study were more likely to be charged with more serious crimes, may offer further support for the first factor.…”

Psychiatric history, due procedural safeguards, and the use of discretion in the criminal justice process

“…These variables include age (Kruttschnitt 1980;Scott 1974;Tiffany, Avichai, and Peters 1975), gender (Bishop and Frazier 1984;Spohn, Gruhl, and Welch 1987), race (Boris 1979;Chiricos, PhiUip, and Waldo 1972;Unnever, Frazier, and Henretta 1980), and socioeconomic status (Pruitt and Wilson 1983;Radelet 1981;Swigert and Farrell 1977), and their impact on decisions made by police (Bynum, Cordner, and Greene 1982;Hepburn 1978;LaFree 1980;Pope 1978;Radelet and Pierce 1985), courts (Burke and Turk 1975;Daly 1987;Kelly 1976), and corrections (Bynum and Paternoster 1984;Carroll and Mondrick 1976;Elion and Megargee 1979;Petersen and Friday 1975;Ramirez 1983).…”

“…Once again, research conducted on the "liberation hypothesis" has found limited support for this explanatory scheme (Pope 1978;Reskin and Visher 1986;Unnever and Hembroff 1988). Alternatively, some researchers posit that although no direct discriminatory effects may be found in case dispositions, prejudicial decisions are incorporated into the earlier phases of the criminal justice process (i.e., presentence investigation report, decision to grant bail, assignment FEDER 283 of counsel) and then are used in the later decisions regarding case outcomes (Albonetti 1991;Elion and Megargee 1979;Swigert and Farrell 1977;Unnever et al 1980). Again, this conceptualization has been helpful in more fully exploring and explaining the inconsistent research findings.…”