Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-hvd4g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-11T05:34:31.082Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Race as a Determinant of Criminal Sentences: A Methodological Critique and a Case Study

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2024

James L. Gibson
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this article I argue that several conceptual and methodological deficiencies have plagued research on racial discrimination. Discrimination is usually conceptualized as a function of societal or institutional forces rather than as an attribute of individual decisionmakers, resulting in research designs that analyze decisions of courts, rather than those of individual judges. However, a finding of no discrimination in aggregate court data does not preclude the possibility that individual judges discriminate against or in favor of minorities. Thus the selection of the unit of analysis, and other methodological choices, can significantly affect substantive conclusions. Finally, research has largely been concerned with description, rather than explanation, and has therefore failed to illuminate the decisional processes that produce discrimination.

Each of these critiques is substantiated with data from the Fulton County (Georgia) Superior Court. My findings suggest three patterns of sentencing among judges: pro-black, anti-black, and nondiscriminatory. Anti-black judges are strongly tied to traditional southern culture, concerned about crime, prejudiced against blacks, and relatively punitive in their sentencing philosophies. In addition, they tend to rely more heavily on the defendant's attitude and prior record in making their sentencing decisions. Thus, discrimination seems to flow from both the attitudinal predispositions of the judges and the process they employ to make decisions.

Type
Research Article
Information
Law & Society Review , Volume 12 , Issue 3: Special Issue on Criminal Justice , Spring 1978 , pp. 455 - 478
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 The Law and Society Association.

References

ALLPORT, Gordon W. (1954) The Nature of Prejudice. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
ARNOLD, Thurman (1935) The Symbols of Government. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
ATKINSON, David N. and Dale A., NEUMAN (1970) “Judicial Attitudes and Defendant Attributes: Some Consequences for Municipal Court Decision-Making,” 19 Journal of Public Law 69.Google Scholar
BAAB, G.A. and W.R., FURGESON Jr. (1968) “Texas Sentencing Practices: A Statistical Study,” 45 Texas Law Review 471.Google Scholar
BURKE, Peter and Austin, TURK (1975) “Factors Affecting Postarrest Dispositions: A Model for Analysis,” 22 Social Problems 313.Google Scholar
CARROLL, Leo and Margaret E., MONDRICK (1976) “Racial Bias in the Decision to Grant Parole,” 11 Law & Society Review 93.Google Scholar
CASTBERG, A. Didrick (1971) “The Ethnic Factor in Criminal Sentencing,” 24 Western Political Quarterly 425.Google Scholar
CHAMBLISS, William J. (1975) Criminal Law in Action. Santa Barbara: Hamilton.Google Scholar
CHAMBLISS, William J. and Robert B., SEIDMAN (1971) Law, Order, and Power. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
CHIRICOS, Theodore and Gordon, WALDO (1975) “Socioeconomic Status and Criminal Sentencing: An Empirical Assessment of a Conflict Proposition,” 40 American Sociological Review 753.Google Scholar
CLARKE, Stevens H. and Gary G., KOCH (1976) “The Influence of Income and Other Factors on Whether Criminal Defendants Go to Prison,” 11 Law & Society Review 57.Google Scholar
COOK, Beverly B. (1973) “Sentencing Behavior of Federal Judges: Draft Cases—1972,” 42 University of Cincinnati Law Review 597.Google Scholar
EISENSTEIN, James and Herbert, JACOB (1977) Felony Justice: An Organizational Analysis of Criminal Courts. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
FARRELL, Ronald A. and Victoria Lynn, SWIGERT (1978) “Prior Offense as a Self-Fulfilling Prophecy,” 12 Law & Society Review 437.Google Scholar
GIBSON, James L. (1978) “Performance Indicators in the Court System,” in Greer, Scott, Hedlund, Ronald and Gibson, James L. (eds.), Accountability in Urban Society: Public Agencies Under Fire. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
GOLDMAN, Nathan (1963) The Differential Selection of Juvenile Offenders for Court Appearance. Hackensack, N.J.: National Council on Crime and Delinquency.Google Scholar
GREENWOOD, Peter, Sorrel, WILDHORN, Eugene C., POGGIO, Michael J., STRUMWASSER and Peter De, LEON (1973) Prosecution of Adult Felony Defendants in Los Angeles County: A Policy Perspective. Santa Monica, Calif.: RAND Corporation.Google Scholar
HAGAN, John (1974) “Extra-legal Attributes and Criminal Sentencing: An Assessment of a Sociological Viewpoint,” 8 Law & Society Review 357.Google Scholar
JACOB, Herbert (1963) “Politics and Criminal Prosecution in New Orleans,” 8 Tulane Studies in Political Science 77.Google Scholar
JAROS, Dean and Robert I., MENDELSOHN (1967) “The Judicial Role and Sentencing Behavior,” 11 Midwest Journal of Political Science 471.Google Scholar
JOHNSTON, J. (1972) Econometric Methods, 2d Ed. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
LABOVITZ, Sanford (1970) “The Assignment of Numbers to Rank Order Categories,” 35 American Sociological Review 515.Google Scholar
LEVIN, Martin A. (1972) “Urban Politics and Judicial Behavior,” 1 The Journal of Legal Studies 200.Google Scholar
MILESKI, Maureen (1971) “Courtroom Encounters: An Observation Study of a Lower Criminal Court,” 5 Law & Society Review 473.Google Scholar
NAGEL, Stuart S. (1970) “The Tipped Scales of American Justice,” in Blumberg, Abraham S. (ed.), The Scales of Justice. Chicago: Aldine.Google Scholar
PASHUKANIS, E.B. (1951) “Theory of Law and Marxism,” in Hazard, John N. (ed.), Soviet Legal Philosophy. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
QUINNEY, Richard (1974) Critique of Legal Order: Crime Control in Capitalist Society. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
QUINNEY, Richard (1977) Class, State, and Crime: On the Theory and Practice of Criminal Justice. New York: David McKay.Google Scholar
REASONS, Charles E. (1975) “Social Thought and Social Structure: Competing Paradigms in Criminology,” 13 Criminology 332.Google Scholar
SCHUBERT, Glendon (1972) “Judicial Process and Behavior, 1963-1971,” in Robinson, James A. (ed.), III Political Science Annual: An International Review. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.Google Scholar
TERRY, R.M. (1967) “The Screening of Juvenile Offenders,” 58 Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science 173.Google Scholar
THORNBERRY, Terence P. (1973) “Race, Socio-economic Status and Sentencing in the Juvenile Justice System,” 64 Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 90.Google Scholar
TIFFANY, Lawrence, Yakov, AVICHAI and Geoffrey, PETERS (1975) “A Statistical Analysis of Sentencing in Federal Courts: Defendants Convicted after Trial, 1967-1968,” 4 Journal of Legal Studies 369.Google Scholar
TURK, Austin T. (1976) “Law as a Weapon in Social Conflict,” 23 Social Problems 276.Google Scholar
UHLMAN, Thomas M. (1977) “The Impact of Defendant Race in Trial— Court Sanctioning Decisions,” in Gardiner, John A. (ed.) Public Law and Public Policy. New York: Praeger.Google Scholar
ULMER, S. Sidney (1973) “Social Background as an Indicator to the Votes of Supreme Court Justices in Criminal Cases: 1947-1956 Terms,” 17 American Journal of Political Science 622.Google Scholar
VINES, Kenneth (1964) “Federal District Judges and Race Relations Cases in the South,” 26 Journal of Politics 337.Google Scholar
WAHLKE, John C. (1970) “Policy Determinants and Legislative Decisions,” in Ulmer, S. Sidney (ed.), Political Decision-Making. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhola.Google Scholar
WILSON, James Q. (1968) “The Police and the Delinquent in Two Cities,” in Wheeler, Stanton (ed.), Controlling Delinquents. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
ZEISEL, Hans (1968) “Methodological Problems in Studies of Sentencing,” 2 Law & Society Review 621.Google Scholar