Alternative Sentences to Prison under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and the Impact of Race and Gender

• In Event: Using Administrative Data for Evidence Building: Findings from the BJS’ Federal Justice Statistics Program

Abstract

Critics of the federal sentencing guidelines have asserted that the guidelines place too much emphasis on sentences to prison. In an era of burgeoning prison populations, alternative sentences to prison may provide a wiser and more appropriate option for certain low-level, low-risk offenders without compromising public safety. That is why some federal judges have recommended amending the guidelines to allow for alternatives in more cases. Alternatives to prison (probation, fines, and intermediate confinement options) are permitted under the guidelines for offenders that fall into certain zones of the federal sentencing grid. An important research question is which offenders actually receive these alternative sentences and whether there are differences according to race and gender. This paper will examine the extent to which alternative sentences to prison are utilized during the post-Booker era. Further, to assess whether significant differences on extra-legal factors exist, we will construct multivariate predictive models to determine the type of offenders likely to receive an alternative sentence. We will use logistic regression to examine the relationship between legal factors (criminal history, offense seriousness, etc.), extra-legal factors (race and gender), and organizational factors (district) with the receipt of an alternative sentence. USSC data on sentenced offenders will be used.

Authors

• William Adams, Urban Institute

• Maria Serakos, Urban Institute