Inter-District Variation and Disparities in Federal Sentencing Outcomes: Case Types, Defendant Characteristics, and Judicial Demography

• In Event: New Directions in Research on Sentencing in US Courts

Abstract

Since their inception, critics have argued that the Federal Sentencing Guidelines have failed to achieve uniformity in punishment as extra-legal disparities in sentencing exist for similarly situated defendants. Sentencing scholars have also noted that inter-district differences in sentencing practices further hinder the amelioration of unwarranted disparity in federal sentencing. Although much research has examined disparity in federal sentencing in general, few studies have explored the scope and nature of inter-district disparities, specifically. The current study uses multilevel modeling techniques to analyze federal data at the case and district level to explore the extent to which inter-district variation exists, and whether case type, defendant characteristics, or judge characteristics are predictors of differential sentencing practices. Results reveal that a minimal amount (less than 10%) of the variation in sentence length is due to district level factors. Furthermore, most of the inter-district variance in sentencing is due to the types of cases the district processes and defendant characteristics rather than the demography of judges on the bench. Partitioned analyses reveal some between inter-district differences in the effects of extra-legal factors across case type and demonstrate how certain case level variables are moderated by district attributes.

Authors

• Rob Tillyer, University of Texas at San Antonio

• Richard Hartley, University of Texas at San Antonio