The Intersection of Crime Seriousness, Discretion, and Race: A Test of the Liberation Hypothesis
The Intersection of Crime Seriousness, Discretion, and Race: A Test of the Liberation Hypothesis
复制标题
犯罪严重性、自由裁量权和种族的交叉点：解放假说的检验
DOI：
10.1080/07418825.2015.1121284
复制
发表时间：
2017
影响因子：
3.2
通讯作者：
Jennifer H. Peck
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
W. Hauser;Jennifer H. Peck
斯波恩和塞德布洛姆对解放假说的解释断言，对于微不足道的罪行，法官在做出量刑决定时，可以“解放”考虑诸如种族等法律外的属性。目前的研究认为，这种观点在理论上可能过于简单化，因为它未能区分自由裁量权和不确定性的概念。根据这一论点，我们审查了佛罗里达州巡回法院对重罪案件的量刑决定。结果表明，黑人和西班牙裔比白人更有可能被监禁，男性比女性更有可能被监禁。与预期相反，这种差距随着犯罪的严重性而扩大。与监禁模式一致，黑人和男性被判处更长的刑期，其影响随着案件的严重程度而增加。我们没有发现证据表明犯罪人的法律外属性的效果取决于办案法官的特征。讨论了对未来研究的建议和对解放假说的启示。
Spohn and Cederblom’s interpretation of the liberation hypothesis asserts that with trivial crimes, judges are “liberated” to consider extra-legal attributes such as race when making sentencing decisions. The current study posits that this perspective may be too theoretically simplistic because it fails to distinguish between the concepts of discretion and uncertainty. In light of this argument, we examine the sentencing decisions of felony cases in the Florida circuit courts. Results indicate that blacks and Hispanics are more likely to be imprisoned than whites, and males more so than females. Contrary to expectations, this disparity increases with crime seriousness. Consistent with the imprisonment model, blacks and males receive longer sentences and the effect increases with case seriousness. We found no evidence that the effect of offender extra-legal attributes depends upon the characteristics of the judges handling the cases. Suggestions for future research and implications for the liberation hypothesis are discussed.