Revisiting the Normal Crime and Liberation Hypotheses: Citizenship Status and Unwarranted Disparity

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

6-1-2012

Abstract

The established sentencing scholarship focusing on race/ethnicity and sentencing disparity indicates that the effect of race/ethnicity on sentencing severity varies across offense types. However, it is not clear whether this argument holds true when race/ethnicity is replaced with offender citizenship status as the primary variable of interest. In light of the research gap, this study extends beyond the existing literature exclusively on race/ethnicity by investigating the nexus between citizenship status, offense types, and sentencing outcomes through the normal crime hypothesis and the liberation hypothesis. Using the Monitoring of Federal Criminal Sentences data that include information on all offenders sentenced in 17 federal district courts for fiscal years 2006-2008, the present study assesses the independent and interactive effects of citizenship status and offense types on the judicial sentence length decision. Findings reveal that although models fail to support the normal crime hypothesis, there is robust support for the liberation hypothesis. © 2012 Georgia State University.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS