Judicial Views and Uses of Michigan’s Advisory Sentencing Guidelines: Preliminary Findings

• In Event: Court Data and Judicial Decision Making

Abstract

Advisory status sentencing guidelines are intended to inform sentencing in a similar manner across judges and courts, thus promoting consistency. However, numerous studies find evidence that the influence advisory guidelines wield over sentencing varies across local actors and contexts. These findings raise important but, as yet, unanswered questions about how advisory guidelines are incorporated into judicial decision-making processes at sentencing and how judicial views of those guidelines might inform their use. There is mounting evidence that judges vary in their views of the deference warranted and the discretion afforded by advisory guidelines and that these views shape how guidelines are used in practice. My dissertation seeks to shed much needed light on these subjects through confidential, semi-structured interviews with a sample of 20-30 trial court judges from the state of Michigan. The large and decentralized nature of Michigan’s judiciary and the substantial latitude granted to judges by the state’s advisory status sentencing guidelines make it an advantageous setting for this study. Preliminary findings from a reflexive thematic analysis of interview data will be presented.

Author

• Amanda Witwer, Michigan State University