Predicting the estimated use of alternatives to incarceration
A greater use of sentencing alternatives to incarceration may help to reduce problems related to prison crowding and high costs of incarceration. However, a judge's ability to use these alternatives more frequently may be hindered by state sentencing policies designed to reduce judicial sentenc...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Contributors: | |
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
1997
|
| In: |
Journal of quantitative criminology
Year: 1997, Volume: 13, Issue: 2, Pages: 121-142 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Keywords: |
| Summary: | A greater use of sentencing alternatives to incarceration may help to reduce problems related to prison crowding and high costs of incarceration. However, a judge's ability to use these alternatives more frequently may be hindered by state sentencing policies designed to reduce judicial sentencing discretion. A study of a national random sample of 181 chief trial court judges revealed that state sentencing policies, court size, and the degree of plea bargaining in a judge's court docket are significant predictors of a judge's estimated use of alternatives to incarceration. Also, these variables are significant predictors of a judge's willingness to use alternatives for specific groups of felons constituting significant proportions of state prison populations. Consistent with the latter finding, a descriptive analysis further revealed that judges who perceive less use of alternatives for felony offenders reside predominantly in states with more crowded prisons. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1573-7799 |
| DOI: | 10.1007/BF02221305 |