« Intriguing little Ninth Circuit ruling rejecting various challenges to denial of parole | Main | Federal prosecutors now seeking 25-year prison term for Rubashkin »

April 29, 2010

"The Stability of Case Processing and Sentencing Post-Booker"

The title of this post is the title of this notable empirical paper that I just noticed via SSRN.  The piece is  authored by Jeffery Todd Ulmer and Michael Thomas Light, and here is the abstract:

In January of 2005, the U.S Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Booker and Fanfan that in order to be constitutional, the federal guidelines must be advisory rather than presumptive. The uncertainty regarding how Booker may change sentencing practices has been a major discussion among legal scholars.  The wake of Booker/Fanfan may bring decreased uniformity and consistency in sentencing between District Courts, and also increased unwarranted disparity based on the social status characteristics of defendants. This is one of the first empirical studies to examine if and how Booker has changed federal sentencing.

We first review the Booker/Fanfan decision and its importance and aftermath, and then review what is known from previous studies of disparity in federal sentencing pre-Booker/Fanfan.  Using survey data taken from judges, lawyers, and probation officers in federal courts, we examine how practices in courts may have changed post-Booker.  We then examine several of the central questions surrounding whether Booker has increased disparity using USSC data on federal sentencing outcomes from three time periods: prior to the 2003 PROTECT Act, the period governed by the PROTECT Act, and the post-Booker/Fanfan period (2006-2007).  The results from the survey data show that while some sentencing practices have changed slightly, Booker has not dramatically altered them.  And from the USSC data we find that while federal judges in general sentence more leniently post-Booker, extralegal disparity and interdistrict variation in the effects of extralegal factors on sentencing have not increased post-Booker.  Thus, allowing judges greater freedom to exercise discretion does not necessarily result in increased extralegal disparity.

April 29, 2010 at 03:26 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e20133ed0fb2b6970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "The Stability of Case Processing and Sentencing Post-Booker":

Comments

I'm very interested in this matter and I myself do alot of research as well. Either way it was a well thought out and nice read so I figured I would leave you a comment.

Posted by: pandora chamrs | Dec 3, 2010 8:51:55 PM

Great Blog! Thanks so much for this useful information.
I hope you will contribute a lot to all your readers and gain more valuable information. Thanks!

Posted by: pandora jewelry | Dec 3, 2010 8:54:32 PM

You posted extremely valuable article that for some reason you got my own interest to try this kind of out.

Posted by: Pandora Canada | Jun 19, 2011 11:07:56 PM

lol at fif’s album leaking a month ahead of time…yikes…shit aint selling at all now

Posted by: thomas sabo wholesalers | Jun 23, 2011 5:38:28 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB