Extending a geographical perspective to the study of jurisdictional consistency in sentencing outcomes

Consistency in sentencing has long been regarded as a fundamental principle of justice. Yet despite its universal importance, research has been hindered by many theoretical and methodological challenges. This study identifies a new concern with strategies used to measure jurisdictional consistency:...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:  
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Reid, Andrew A. (Autor)
Otros Autores: MacAlister, David
Tipo de documento: Electrónico Artículo
Lenguaje:Inglés
Publicado: 2018
En: The British journal of criminology
Año: 2018, Volumen: 58, Número: 5, Páginas: 1147-1170
Acceso en línea: Presumably Free Access
Volltext (Resolving-System)
Journals Online & Print:
Gargar...
Verificar disponibilidad: HBZ Gateway
Palabras clave:
Descripción
Sumario:Consistency in sentencing has long been regarded as a fundamental principle of justice. Yet despite its universal importance, research has been hindered by many theoretical and methodological challenges. This study identifies a new concern with strategies used to measure jurisdictional consistency: direct measures fail to account for sentencing patterns developed at the local level. The objective of this study is to assess the utility of applying a geographical perspective to analyses of sentencing outcomes—one concerned with proportionate comparisons between jurisdictions. This is achieved by proposing a variant of a common metric applied in geographical research: the location quotient. Analyses using the new strategy compare sentence outcomes across provincial/territorial jurisdictions in Canada (2014–15). The technique identifies new patterns of consistency and inconsistency that would otherwise have gone undetected.
ISSN:1464-3529
DOI:10.1093/bjc/azx084