Data included records, observations, and interviews with the 10 presiding magistrates. Cases included only those offenses for which a prison sentence was empirically possible (e.g., burglary, theft, assault). Results indicate that factors influencing the sentencing decision included type of offense, history of previous prison sentence, number of charges involved in the hearing, prior convictions, value of goods involved in the offense, and employment status. Women and older people were less likely to receive prison sentences, but this is largely accounted for by the offense distributions of these groups. An analysis of the pattern of judicial decisionmaking with respect to custodial sentences indicates that judges varied considerably in their decisionmaking styles. Two models of decisionmaking could be identified. Under the legal model, the decision is based on legally relevant variables, foremost whether the defendant was already serving a prison sentence, the offense, and specifics of the offense. Social variables appear to be considered only in marginal cases (those of medium seriousness). Under the attitudinal model, sentencing decisions appear to be based largely on individual judges' attitudes toward custodial sentences. These judges rarely impose a prison sentence for those who have no prior imprisonments. 2 figures and 21 references.