Sentencing guidelines, judicial discretion and plea bargaining
نویسنده
چکیده
The United States Sentencing Commission was created to develop federal sentencing guidelines, which restrict judicial discretion and were found to increase the average sentence length while leaving unchanged the likelihood of resolution through plea bargaining. A game theoretic model is developed in which a sentencing commission may impose guidelines or defer to judicial discretion; then a defendant and a prosecutor engage in plea bargaining; finally, those cases that fail to settle go to trial, where a sentence is determined according to the guidelines, if imposed, or, if not, according to judicial discretion. Equilibrium behavior is consistent with the aforementioned findings.
منابع مشابه
Measuring and Explaining Charge Bargaining
Charge bargaining is a potentially important form of discretion in criminal sentencing that is obscured in many studies of sentencing outcomes. Our procedure to measure the difference in sentencing outcomes caused by plea bargain emphasizes the amount, in months, that the sentence length is reduced. Using this measure, we compare prosecutorial discretion across counties in two different states....
متن کامل”Reasonably Predictable:” The Reluctance to Embrace Judicial Discretion for Substantial Assistance Procedures
In United States v. Booker, the Supreme Court held that the Federal Sentencing Guidelines are no longer mandatory, yet still instructed sentencing courts to continue to advise the Guidelines. In light of this expanded judicial discretion, post-Booker cooperation, or 5K1.1, motions made by the government are of particular interest because it can have the potential to increase the court’s power w...
متن کاملHave Inter-Judge Sentencing Disparities Increased in an Advisory Guidelines Regime? Evidence from Booker
The Federal Sentencing Guidelines were promulgated in response to concerns of widespread disparities in sentencing. After almost two decades of determinate sentencing, the Guidelines were rendered advisory in United States v. Booker. How has greater judicial discretion affected interjudge disparities, or differences in sentencing outcomes that are attributable to the mere happenstance of the se...
متن کاملDiscontinuous Tradition of Sentencing Discretion: Koon's Failure to Recognize the Reshaping of Judicial Discretion under the Guidelines, The
Looked at from a general science of law, the effective individualizing agency in the administration of justice is discretion .... Discretion is an authority conferred by law to act in certain conditions or situations in accordance with an official's or an official agency's own considered judgment and conscience .'
متن کاملPlea Bargaining
Is plea bargaining, synonymous to pleading guilty. Day by day, partakers in criminal justice system are either in confusion or in an intellectual debate on the innovative changes in sentencing system under the Indian Criminal jurisprudence. Of course, root cause is the introduction of Chapter XXIA, in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, containing Sections 265 A to 265L, which deal with plea ...
متن کامل