THE THREE MODELS CHOSEN FOR COMPARISON OF CAUSAL SEQUENCES PROMOTING VARIABILITY IN DISTRICT COURT SENTENCING WERE: (1) EMILE DURKHEIM'S FUNCTIONAL MODEL, (2) RICHARD QUINNEY'S POWER ELITE INTERPRETATION, AND (3) WILLIAM CHAMBLISS' SYSTEMIC STRAIN INTERPRETATION. AN ABSTRACT DESCRIPTION OF EACH IS FOLLOWED BY SPECIFICATION OF MIDDLE RANGE THEORETICAL MODELS OF FORMAL SOCIAL CONTROL. IMPLICITLY INCORPORATED WITHIN THE SYSTEMIC STRAIN MODEL IS A CAUSAL ORDER BETWEEN JUDICIAL CASELOADS, USE OF COUNSEL, AND TYPE OF HEARING. NEXT, AN ANALYSIS OF THE ALLOCATION OF DISTRICT COURTS BY STATE, THE PATTERNS OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY IDENTIFIED BY THE FEDERAL COURT SYSTEM, AND A DELINEATION OF THE USE OF SENTENCING ALTERNATIVES BY FEDERAL JUDGES RESULTED IN A TEMPORAL SEQUENCE OF MEASURABLE VARIABLES. THEN EACH MODEL WAS EMPIRICALLY TESTED BY MULTIVARIATE ANALYTICAL TECHNIQUES TO DETERMINE ITS ABILITY TO EXPLAIN SENTENCING PATTERNS IN THE FEDERAL DISTRICT COURT SYSTEM. IT IS CONCLUDED THAT THE SYSTEMIC STRAIN MODEL PRESENTS A MORE COMPREHENSIVE EXPLANATION OF THE SEVERITY OF SENTENCES IMPOSED IN FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS. THE CONCLUDING CHAPTER PRESENTS A HEURISTICALLY RESPECIFIED MODEL AND OFFERS MODIFIED THEORETICAL PROPOSITIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH ON FEDERAL DISTRICT COURTS' SENTENCING PATTERNS. FIGURES, TABLES, AND APPROXIMATELY 120 REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED.