IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/r/oup/jleorg/v23y2007i1p24-56.html
   My bibliography  Save this item

Strategic Judging Under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines: Positive Political Theory and Evidence

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as


Cited by:

  1. Cécile Bourreau-Dubois & Myriam Doriat-Duban & Bruno Jeandidier & Jean-Claude Ray, 2023. "Do child support guidelines result in lower inter-judge disparity? The case of the French advisory child support guidelines," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 87-116, February.
  2. Joshua B. Fischman & Max M. Schanzenbach, 2012. "Racial Disparities Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines: The Role of Judicial Discretion and Mandatory Minimums," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 729-764, December.
  3. Xiaoyu Cui & Jianlei Han & Jeong Bon Kim & Baolei Qi, 2024. "Federal judge ideology, securities class action litigation, and stock price crash risk," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 64(4), pages 4131-4155, December.
  4. David Abrams & Roberto Galbiati & Emeric Henry & Arnaud Philippe, 2019. "When in Rome… on local norms and sentencing decisions," Sciences Po publications 88, Sciences Po.
  5. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/4jcok93a4m9d1qtc3vnp4bdefk is not listed on IDEAS
  6. David Abrams & Roberto Galbiati & Emeric Henry & Arnaud Philippe, 2022. "When in Rome... On Local Norms and Sentencing Decisions," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 20(2), pages 700-738.
  7. Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2008. "Judicial Fact Discretion," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 37(1), pages 1-35, January.
  8. William Harbaugh & Naci Mocan & Michael Visser, 2013. "Theft and Deterrence," Journal of Labor Research, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 389-407, December.
  9. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/3sb2i4b2r694sqks71jbjihput is not listed on IDEAS
  10. Joshua B. Fischman & Max M. Schanzenbach, 2011. "Do Standards of Review Matter? The Case of Federal Criminal Sentencing," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 40(2), pages 405-437.
  11. Shawn D. Bushway & Emily G. Owens & Anne Morrison Piehl, 2012. "Sentencing Guidelines and Judicial Discretion: Quasi‐Experimental Evidence from Human Calculation Errors," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(2), pages 291-319, June.
  12. Tim Friehe & Thomas J. Miceli, 2016. "Law Enforcement in a Federal System: On the Strategic Choice of Sanction Levels," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 45(1), pages 73-103.
  13. Cécile Bourreau-Dubois & Myriam Doriat-Duban & Bruno Jeandidier & Jean Claude Ray, 2020. "Do sentencing guidelines result in lower inter-judge disparity? Evidence from framed field experiment," Working Papers of BETA 2020-28, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
  14. Crow, Matthew S. & Goulette, Natalie, 2022. "Judicial diversity and sentencing disparity across U.S. District Courts," Journal of Criminal Justice, Elsevier, vol. 82(C).
  15. Michael Abramowicz & Emerson H. Tiller, 2009. "Citation to Legislative History: Empirical Evidence on Positive Political and Contextual Theories of Judicial Decision Making," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 38(2), pages 419-443, June.
  16. Cécile Bourreau-Dubois & Myriam Doriat-Duban & Bruno Jeandidier & Jean Ray, 2020. "Do sentencing guidelines result in lower inter-judge disparity ? Evidence from framed field experiment," Working Papers hal-02978348, HAL.
  17. Emerson H. Tiller, 2015. "The Law and Positive Political Theory of Panel Effects," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(S1), pages 35-58.
  18. repec:spo:wpecon:info:hdl:2441/4jcok93a4m9d1qtc3vnp4bdefk is not listed on IDEAS
  19. Thomas J. Miles, 2012. "Racial Disparities in Wiretap Applications before Federal Judges," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 41(2), pages 419-458.
  20. David Abrams & Roberto Galbiati & Emeric Henry & Arnaud Philippe, 2019. "When in Rome… on local norms and sentencing decisions," SciencePo Working papers Main hal-03393093, HAL.
  21. Gordon Ballingrud, 2021. "Ideology and Risk Focus: Conservatism and Opinion‐Writing In the U.S. Supreme Court," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(1), pages 281-300, January.
  22. Kubick, Thomas R. & Lockhart, G. Brandon & Mauer, David C., 2023. "Judge ideology and debt contracting," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 152(C).
  23. repec:spo:wpmain:info:hdl:2441/4jcok93a4m9d1qtc3vnp4bdefk is not listed on IDEAS
  24. repec:hal:wpspec:info:hdl:2441/4jcok93a4m9d1qtc3vnp4bdefk is not listed on IDEAS
  25. Todd Sorensen & Supriya Sarnikar & Ronald L. Oaxaca, 2012. "Race and Gender Differences under Federal Sentencing Guidelines," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(3), pages 256-260, May.
  26. Cécile Bourreau-Dubois & Bruno Deffains & Myriam Doriat-Duban & Bruno Jeandidier, 2021. "Guidelines: Decision-Making Tools for Litigantsand Judges [Les barèmes, outils d’aide à la décision pour les justiciables et les juges]," Post-Print hal-03054417, HAL.
  27. Crystal S. Yang, 2015. "Free at Last? Judicial Discretion and Racial Disparities in Federal Sentencing," The Journal of Legal Studies, University of Chicago Press, vol. 44(1), pages 75-111.
  28. Cécile Bourreau-Dubois & Myriam Doriat-Duban & Bruno Jeandidier & Jean Claude Ray, 2020. "Do sentencing guidelines result in lower inter-judge disparity? Evidence from framed field experiment," Working Papers of BETA 2020-28, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
  29. Allen Huang & Kai Wai Hui & Reeyarn Zhiyang Li, 2019. "Federal Judge Ideology: A New Measure of Ex Ante Litigation Risk," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 57(2), pages 431-489, May.
IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.