Abstract
This paper presents a typology of discretion that differs from the standard typology of discretion in the legal literature: Type A discretion, which is the generally recognized discretion of individual actors to make decisions within a set of laws and rules, and Type B discretion, which is the crafting of laws and setting of rules in the first place. An analysis using aggregate data from 1992 to 2002 points to the prosecution stage as the primary source of Type A discretion that contributed to the massive increase in incarceration during this period. To understand how this could happen, this paper argues that actions need to be linked to outcomes. We identify three key outcomes of the sanctioning process-crime control, justice (guilt/innocence), racial disparity (fairness)-that deserve more attention from social scientists.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 199-222 |
| Number of pages | 24 |
| Journal | Justice Quarterly |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Apr 2013 |
Keywords
- crime reduction
- criminal justice system
- discretion
- prosecutors
- sentencing
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Studying Discretion in the Processes that Generate Criminal Justice Sanctions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver