Evaluating Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Laws in Pennsylvania and their Utility (or Futility) in Crime Control

• In Event: Evaluating Crime Control Strategies

Abstract

Following the precedent set by the US Supreme Court’s Alleyne decision in 2013, two years later the Pennsylvania Supreme Court (Pennsylvania v. Hopkins) ruled that a series of state-level mandatory minimums sentencing laws were unconstitutional. Specifically, prosecutor-initiated mandatory minimum sentences were repealed, invalidating several drug and violence related sentence enhancements. In this paper we conduct a county level analysis of the mandatory minimum repeal, assessing its impact on a variety of crime types using fixed effects regressions. We also use interrupted time series models with undefined structural breaks to determine if counties experience a discontinuous change in crime at or around the mandatory minimum repeal. Findings and implications for theory and policy are discussed.

Authors

• Kristofer Bret Bucklen, Pennsylvania Department of Corrections

• Nicole Frisch, Merrimack College

• Emily Morgan Glazener, University of Maryland

• Oren M. Gur, Philadelphia District Attorney's Office / Penn State Abington

• Anat Kimchi, University of Maryland