Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Criminal Justice Review
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
0734016808328673v1
34/3/350    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kautt, P. M.
Right arrow Articles by Mueller-Johnson, K.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Cross-Jurisdictional Disposition Variability Under Sentencing Guidelines

The Example of Equivalent Sex Offenses

Paula M. Kautt

University of Cambridge, UK

Katrin Mueller-Johnson

University of Cambridge, UK

The sentencing guidelines of different jurisdictions often have distinct objectives and approaches to sentencing. Drawing on the arguments of past research as well as focal concerns and populist punitiveness, the current research assesses whether or not differences in design and implementation of the sentencing guidelines of two systems (Pennsylvania and Oregon) influence the incarceration and sentence length decisions meted out to comparable sex offenders within these jurisdictions. The authors hypothesize that, despite having similar grid-based configurations, variations in the history and structure of these guidelines significantly influence predictors of sentencing outcomes across these jurisdictions. Using indecent assault and sexual abuse cases, this research explores how well the aforementioned orientations perform in explaining the incarceration and sentence length decisions within and across these two jurisdictions.

Key Words: sentencing guidelines • comparative analysis • sex offenses • criminal sentencing • state courts

This version was published on September 1, 2009

Criminal Justice Review, Vol. 34, No. 3, 350-381 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0734016808328673
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?