skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 

NCJ Number: 228467 Find in a Library
Title: Cross-Jurisdictional Disposition Variability Under Sentencing Guidelines: The Example of Equivalent Sex Offenses
Journal: Criminal Justice Review  Volume:34  Issue:3  Dated:September 2009  Pages:351-381
Author(s): Paula M. Kautt; Katrin Mueller-Johnson
Date Published: September 2009
Page Count: 31
Publisher: http://www.sagepub.com 
Type: Report (Study/Research)
Format: Article
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This study examined whether or not differences in design and implementation of the sentencing guidelines of two systems, Pennsylvania and Oregon, influenced the incarceration and sentence length decisions meted out to comparable sex offenders within these jurisdictions.
Abstract: The findings of this study demonstrated differences between focal concerns system and populist punitiveness systems in terms of likelihood of incarceration and sentence length for comparable offenders. In addition, the predictors for both outcomes differed between the two systems, suggesting that, despite surface similarity, the two sets of guidelines operate quite differently. The results indicate significant differences both between and within guideline systems that change over time and with the introduction of subsequent structural sentencing interventions. The sentencing guidelines of different jurisdictions often have distinct objectives and approaches to sentencing. In this study, two grid-based guideline systems were identified for which data with comparable offenses and of the same timeframe were publicly available: Pennsylvania and Oregon. The study demonstrates how each system respectively possesses populist punitiveness or focal concerns characteristics, making them, despite their cosmetic similarity, qualitatively different kinds of guideline systems. The scope was narrowed to focus on a single sex offense, leading to an examination of the States' own classifications as outlined in their criminal statutes. Tables, appendix, notes, and references
Main Term(s): Sentencing guidelines
Index Term(s): Comparative analysis; Oregon; Pennsylvania; Sentencing commissions; Sentencing/Sanctions; Sex offenses; State courts; State-by-state analyses
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=250486

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.