Have Federal Judges Changed Their Sentencing Practices? The Shaky Empirical Foundations of the Feeney Amendment

Max Schanzenbach

Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, 2005, vol. 2, issue 1, 1-48

Abstract: The Feeney Amendment to the PROTECT Act of 2003 restricted judicial discretion to make downward departures. Supporters of the Amendment argued that federal district court judges were increasingly departing below the ranges specified in the Sentencing Guidelines, reducing sentences and increasing sentencing disparities. Using data on all federal criminal sentences between 1993 and 2001, this article argues that federal sentencing practices did not change appreciably over the relevant time period. First, while the rate of downward departures increased, much of the increase can be explained by a number of potentially relevant variables such as type of offense, the offense level, district of sentencing, and offender characteristics. Second, even though downward departures were more frequent, average total prison sentences hardly changed. Third, there is no evidence that the increasing number of Democratic appointees on the federal district court bench affected average prison sentences or the rate of downward departures. Finally, the influence of Guidelines factors on prison sentences has remained constant.

Date: 2005
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1740-1461.2005.00030.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:wly:empleg:v:2:y:2005:i:1:p:1-48

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Empirical Legal Studies from John Wiley & Sons
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().