The Impact of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Reform: A Comparative Analysis*

By Tiede, Lydia Brashear | Justice System Journal, January 1, 2009 | Go to article overview

The Impact of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Reform: A Comparative Analysis*


Tiede, Lydia Brashear, Justice System Journal


In this article, application of the United States Sentencing Guidelines among district court judges adjudicating substantially similar drug cases is compared. When district court judges use the Guidelines, either applying ranges from the sentencing table or explicitly departing from them, average sentences and sentence variation among the circuits analyzed are very similar. However, rates of departure from the Guidelines by district court judges in some circuits vary significantly. Further, district court judges in the circuits analyzed reacted differently than judges nationwide to three significant legal events: the PROTECT Act (2003) (limiting judicial discretion), Blakely v. Washington (2004), and United States v. Booker (2005) (expanding judicial discretion). This analysis suggests that long-existing federal Sentencing Guideline schemes, whether mandatory or advisory, reduce disparities in sentences when judges apply the Guideline ranges, but not disparities associated with the choice of whether to apply those ranges.

By establishing federal Sentencing Guidelines as part of the Sentencing Reform Act (SRA) of 1984 (Title II of the Comprehensive Control Act of 1984), Congress limited judges' sentencing discretion in an attempt to reduce the disparity of sentences across regions for similarly situated defendants convicted of the same crime.1 Subsequent reforms in the form of the Prosecutorial Remedies and Other Tools to End the Exploitation of Children Today Act of 2003, Pub. L. No. 10821 (the PROTECT Act) further reduced judges' sentencing discretion until the U.S. Supreme Court found that the Guidelines were unconstitutional in United States v. Booker (2005) . In this article, application of the Guidelines and of the reform of these Guidelines by district court judges in select circuits is compared to ascertain whether limiting sentencing discretion reduces disparity of case outcomes.

DISPARITY AMONG JUDGES

In the federal sentencing arena, the United States Sentencing Commission (USSC), as well as several scholars, found that the Sentencing Guidelines reduced sentencing disparity as compared with pre-guideline sentencing2 (USSC, 1991, 2004b:95-97; Karle and Sager, 1991; GAO 1991; Anderson, Kling, and Stith, 1999; Waldfogel, 1991, 1998). Although acknowledging that disparity had been reduced with the introduction of the Guidelines, many have written how disparity persisted even under the federal Guideline regime (e.g., Miller, 2002; Heaney, 1991; Hofer et al., 1999; Albonetti, 1997; Everett and Wojkiewicz, 2002; Kautt, 2002; Kautt and Spohn, 2002). Despite the differences in these findings, the USSC in its fifteen-year report insisted that findings using the newer approach of hierarchical models (USSC, 2004a: 101 and Appendix D) indicated "relatively minor inter-judge and regional disparity not explained by case differences."

While disparity often is acknowledged to exist, some scholars focus on the source of disparity rather than its magnitude. Many, including the USSC, believe that disparity is due to pre-sentencing differences in prosecutors' charging and pleading practices (USSC, 2004a; Bibas, 2005); the availability of certain types of defense attorneys (Berman, 2002); caseloads (Braniff, 1993); and local case -processing practices (Ulmer, 2005). Still others believe disparity is primarily due to gender, race, and ethnicity (Mustard, 2001; Free, 1997; Pasko, 2002). Finally, disparity often corresponds to region where district court judges are located (USSC, 1995, 1996). This article focuses on regional disparity.

The purpose of this article is to analyze specifically whether there is disparity in how legal constraints, in the form of legislation or higher- court mandates that alter the amount of discretion that judges may exercise, are applied by district court judges. The present study examines one specific crime, matched by case facts, and employs a method similar to that used by the USSC in 1991, but subsequently abandoned. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The Impact of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Reform: A Comparative Analysis*
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Buy instant access to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    Buy instant access to save your work.

    Already a member? Log in now.

    Oops!

    An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.