Too Many Black Men: The Sentencing Judge's Dilemma

Legal reform sometimes has unanticipated, even ironic, results. A good example is federal legislation adopted in the 1980s that was supposed to enhance equity in sentencing. Congress, like many state legislatures in this period, reduced judicial control over sentencing by adopting presumptive sentencing guidelines for all serious criminal offenses and mandatory sentences for some specific crimes. Reformers did succeed in reducing judicial discretion in the sentencing process, but racial disparities have gotten much worse. Unprecedented numbers of minorities, particularly black men, are going to jail for long terms. The situation leaves trial judges in a difficult position. They are legally bound to implement a sentencing regime that many of them believe is racially discriminatory. Herbert Jacob's work on criminal trial courts provides a framework for investigating this problem. As Jacob's organizational approach predicts, judges were initially more troubled by the diminution of their powers than by the emerging pattern of increased minority incarceration. Nevertheless, some judges have criticized the racial implications of the sentencing law, protesting in various, resourceful ways. Judicial resistance to a law on moral grounds, though rare, is significant because it represents a break in the ranks of officialdom that enhances the moral credibility of critics of the current law.     

Judges as therapists and therapists as judges: the collision of judicial and therapeutic roles in drug treatment courts

This paper explores the implications of the expansion of judicial and therapeutic roles in a drug treatment court (DTC) in Canada. Issues that are raised are: how the courtroom is framed as a therapeutic space where public appearances by participants are part of the therapeutic process; how judges have taken on therapeutic practices, effectively compromising their traditional role as neutral arbiter; how certain women resisted therapeutic interventions by judges and felt they received harsher punishments than men; and how treatment counselors in DTCs are given powers of enforcement over their clients. The collision of judicial and therapeutic roles in the DTC results in negative consequences for individuals in the specialized courts. Specifically, DTC participants are expected to engage in a therapeutic relationship with their treatment counselors and the court; however, their right to confidentiality is withheld, and their treatment counselors act as agents for the court.     

英美两国刑事法官的证据调查权评析

人们长期认为,英美法系的法官在法庭上一般是消极、被动地听审,却不能积极调查证据。事实上,英美两国的立法与审判实践却表明:法官可以询问证人、传唤证人出庭,或进行"庭外勘验"。尤其在没有陪审团参与的审判中,法官能更加主动地调查证据。这说明,英美两国的刑事法官并非完全消极、被动,特别是当庭审主体变为一元的职业法官时,他因对案件事实最终负责,而更加具有调查证据的天然冲动。由此可见,中国刑事法官在庭审中无需亦不能塑造成纯粹的仲裁者角色,而应保留适当的且受到法律合理规制的证据调查权。     

A Gramscian Approach to Studying the Judicial Decision-Making Process

This paper applies a Gramscian analytical framework to scrutinise the judicial decision-making process. Based on two distinct research projects, the article explores how, on one hand judges in criminal courts can be identified as part of the bureaucratic machinery of the state, as ‘technicians of repression’; whereas, on the other hand, human rights judges can be distinguished as providing ‘moral and intellectual leadership’ in their production and reproduction of certain values. Some of the key questions this article seeks to answer are: What is the role of hegemony in the judicial decision-making process? To what extent are legal actors both ‘technicians of repression’ and ‘moral and intellectual leaders’? This paper uses examples from empirical research conducted at courts in Argentina and at the European and Inter-American Courts of Human Rights to identify and explore this dual role of judges as both repressive technicians and moral and intellectual leaders in neo-liberal capitalist societies.     

Reporting sensational trials: Free press,a responsible press,and cameras in the courts

It is common today to criticize the media for the way in which they report sensational trials. Lawyers often join in this criticism, claiming that the portrayals harm their public image. This article examines such complaints and demonstrates that including cameras in the courts need not lengthen a criminal trial, nor substantially affect the judicial process. Using the O.J. Simpson criminal case as a backdrop, the article shows how delays in that case were caused not by cameras, but by the judge's inconsistent rulings that signaled to the defense lawyers that they were under a different and more lenient standard than the prosecutors. Surveys of American judges show that those who have experienced cameras in their own courtroom have come to the conclusion that such media coverage does not impede justice, aids the public in understanding the judicial process and has little effect on American's perceptions of lawyers. Those judges who have the urge to play to the cameras should ban them, but if they do not, the blame lies with them and not the media, which simply report what is happening.     

Women judges who judge women offenders: a Chinese case study on gender and judging

ABSTRACT

Based on an empirical study, this article examines Chinese female judges’ life experiences and worldviews by asking: are women judges feminist or pro-feminism? Given the very nature of feminism, if a large number of women judges are feminist or pro-feminism, they are likely to bring attention to women’s issues in the judiciary and the judicial process. If so, women’s equal participation in courts would make a vital difference in law and judicial production. The article first provides the context of the research on which this article is based. Next, it briefly outlines several key methodological issues. Then, it presents findings on female judges’ perceptions of women’s gender roles, their views about female offending and their awareness of feminism. Finally, it highlights the evidence presented and offers implications of the research.     

论量刑规范化的实现路径——以刑罚差异性为切入点

量刑是法官在遵循犯罪事实和刑法规范的基础上,运用自身经验和司法逻辑进行理性判断的过程,科学的量刑结果不可能完全整齐划一。电脑或数学量刑均无法代替法官自身经验和智慧。因此量刑规范化的实现,有赖于在立法完善的前提下,发挥和提高法官自身的司法智慧。     

THE BEST SEAT IN THE HOUSE: THE COURT ASSIGNMENT AND JUDICIAL SATISFACTION

A survey of 355 judges examined the differences in judicial satisfaction between those assigned to problem-solving courts—such as drug treatment and unified family—and judges in other more traditional assignments such as family law and criminal courts. The unified family court systems, like drug treatment courts, have generally adopted the principles of therapeutic jurisprudence. Significant differences were found on each of the three survey scales: (1) helpfulness, (2) attitude toward litigants, and (3) positive effects of assignment. The judges who were in the problem-solving courts (drug treatment and unified family court) scored higher on all three scales than those who were not (traditional family and criminal court). The group of problem-solving court judges consistently scored higher than the other group of judges, with the drug treatment court judges scoring the highest. The group of traditional criminal court and family court judges scored less positively, with the criminal court judges having the lowest scores. The problem-solving court judges were more likely to report believing that the role of the court should include helping litigants address the problems that brought them there and were more likely to observe positive changes in the litigants. They were also more likely to believe that litigants are motivated to change and are able to do so. They felt more respected by the litigants and were more likely to think that the litigants were grateful for help they received. The problem-solving court judges were also more likely to report being happy in their assignments and to believe that these assignments have a positive emotional effect on them.     

Gender dynamics in the sentencing of white-collar offenders

Theory and empirical research often have agreed that female and white-collar offenders benefit from leniency at the sentencing stage of criminal justice system processing. An untested research question emerging from these distinct bodies of literature is whether the greatest leniency is afforded to female white-collar offenders. We investigate the individual and interactive influences of gender and white-collar conviction on judicial leniency by analyzing Florida sentencing guidelines data from 1994 to 2004 using multinomial logistic regression to model the decision to incarcerate nonviolent economic offenders in jail or prison rather than sentence them to community control. Results indicate that female street offenders sentenced by male judges receive the most lenient sentences, while male offenders are punished the harshest regardless of the gender of the sentencing judge or type of crime. Theoretical and policy implications of the findings are discussed in terms of focal concerns, familial paternalism, and attributional perspectives on judicial decision-making.     

情理推断在刑事证明中的规范运作 以事实证成理论为分析框架

情理推断是以经验知识为前提的推论,其在司法证明中的作用是必要但危险的。我国现行印证证明模式中并没有包容情理推断的空间,但其却在实践中隐性运作,同时因缺少约束机制而易于导致权力滥用甚至恣意裁判。为化解合法性与正当性危机,有必要规范情理推断在司法证明中的运作。然而,传统印证证明理论的外部视角,无法描摹司法证明的全貌,可以引入一种内部观察视角作为补充。司法证明在结构上是包含价值判断的论证式经验推论,事实认定因而具有似真性。在似真性证明的制度语境中,情理推断作用于从证据命题推导出案件事实的证明过程之中,辅助裁判者认定并证成对事实的确信。在该事实证成的理论分析框架中,情理推断的规范运作需要以认知开放的竞争性论辩程序为场域,以包容性的证明方法体系为前提;为防止权力滥用,还应给裁判者施加事实证成义务。     

Detained: A Study of Immigration Bond Hearings

Immigration judges make consequential decisions that fundamentally affect the basic life chances of thousands of noncitizens and their family members every year. Yet, we know very little about how immigration judges make their decisions, including decisions about whether to release or detain noncitizens pending the completion of their immigration cases. Using original data on long‐term immigrant detainees, I examine for the first time judicial decision making in immigration bond hearings. I find that there are extremely wide variations in the average bond grant rates and bond amount decisions among judges in the study sample. What are the determinants of these bond decisions? My analysis shows that the odds of being granted bond are more than 3.5 times higher for detainees represented by attorneys than those who appeared pro se, net of other relevant factors. My analysis also shows that the detainees' prior criminal history is the only significant legally relevant factor in both the grant/deny and bond amount decisions, net of other relevant factors. This finding points to the need for further research on whether and how immigration courts might be exercising crime control through administrative proceedings.     

论我国刑事司法鉴定权配置的困境与突破

我国刑事司法鉴定权由公检法机关主导,当事人仅有申请补充鉴定和重新鉴定的权利。这种鉴定权配置方式导致刑事司法公正性不足、效率低下以及权威性缺失的困境。与我国刑事诉讼模式的转型格格不入。借鉴域外经验,我国刑事司法鉴定权配置应以公正高效权威为目标,赋予辩方司法鉴定启动权、保留侦控机关自行启动鉴定权、限制法官的鉴定启动权以及建立鉴定处分的司法审查制度,逐步形成与我国刑事诉讼模式相契合的刑事司法鉴定权配置方式。     

Women in the Nigerian judiciary: considerable headway or organised progress?

ABSTRACT

Women have made considerable progress in terms of their entrance into the legal profession, such that they are advancing towards parity with men on the High Court benches in Nigeria. This study is a product of qualitative empirical data gathered from interviews with judges and information gleaned from government records and personal files of judges in the Archives of the judiciaries in Mid-Western Nigeria. It identifies reasons for the increase in the number of women on the High Court Bench in the area. Women entering the legal professions in Nigeria from the 1930s opted for a career in government legal service and the Magistracy with less financial remuneration but regular work hours, than in private legal practice that provides higher remunerations and irregular work hours. Findings reveal that the number of women judges increased when it became fairly established to tunnel 90% of appointments to the High Court from these channels. The preliminary conclusion therefore, is that, although women lawyers have made considerable headway as High Court judges, the increase in their numbers on the High Court bench was not as a result of any organised policy to increase the number of women judges in Nigeria.     

Judges who drive under the influence of alcohol: ethical implications and the role of restorative justice measures to balance judicial duty and societal expectations

Judges across the US have been charged or convicted of driving while intoxicated, yet many judges are allowed to continue to practice despite their criminal act(s). The issue becomes not only a societal issue, but also an ethical and professional one which impacts the individual criminal justice practitioner and criminal justice agencies. Duty to judicial and social expectations informs an argument regarding ethical theories: deontology and utilitarianism. Solutions include an examination of restorative justice measures such as: a balance of service to the community such as participating in victim-offender mediation and victim-offender panels as the offender, and completing community service where the victim chooses the judges number of hours and location of the service. While some may believe these jurists should suffer punitive punishments such as loss of judgeships, long-term treatment, and extensive probation coupled with individual psychiatric therapy, consideration of all factors with restoration in mind, might be more appropriate for these judicial offenders.     

Courtroom Discourse and the Gendered Construction of Professional Identity

In addition to providing an arena for dispute resolution, the courtroom serves lawyers and judges as an important site for the construction and maintenance of their Professional identity. It is mainly through the strategic use of language within the constraints on courtroom discourse that this process takes place. Within the framework of feminist theories of language as constituent of social identity, this paper analyzes courtroom interaction to determine how gender affects the construction of the Professional identity of lawyers and judges in Israeli district courts. Quantitative analyses of terms of address, intrusions, judges'takeover of examinations, challenging comments, and the forms and use of directives indicated that women judges and women lawyers were accorded less deference than men, and that the Professional competence of women lawyers was challenged and undermined. The qualitative analysis of the off-the-record comments by judges, lawyers, and witnesses to lawyers revealed that all participants questioned the professional performance of women lawyers in gender-stereotypic ways. The devaluation of women professionals and the gendered interpretations of their behavior enacted through the discourse in the courtroom may have implications for the outcomes of trials.     

It’s a man’s world: barriers to gender transformation in the South African judiciary. Perspectives from women advocates and attorneys

The judiciary in South Africa has made great strides in creating a diverse bench. However challenges continue as regards the appointment of women, some of which are attributable to the nature of the legal profession. Currently, there are 86 women judges in the Superior Courts nationally out of a total of 243. Judges are drawn from the professions of advocates, attorneys, magistracy and academia. Women in these areas of law are confronted with issues that have a bearing on any aspirations of future accession to the judicial bench. The aim of this article is to analyse two specific challenges faced by women advocates and attorneys that were identified over the course of the last three years through legal sector meetings. These are the unequal distribution of work and discriminatory perceptions of women’s abilities. I argue that the two factors are directly related to the inadequate representation of women on the bench. My argument will be informed by, amongst others, dialogues from the legal sector meetings, observations of the judicial appointments process and desktop research. I conclude that failing to engage with the identified obstacles will negate any efforts to further increase the number of women judges.     

Pre-verdict Judicial Fact-finding in Criminal Trials with Juries

In criminal trials with a jury, judges have many opportunitiesto engage in adjudicative fact-finding before the jury retires.English law has no conceptual framework for examining this judicialfact-finding which encompasses two categories of collateralfact (preliminary and underlying fact) and foreign law. A thirdcategory of collateral fact (conditional fact) is decided bythe jury. The article examines the nature of judicial fact-findingand the history and rationale for this allocation of fact-findingresponsibility between judge and jury.     

论法官的道德自觉与法的确定性

法官道德包括个人道德内在自律和职业道德外在约束,法官的个人道德又包括作为常人的道德层面和高于常人的道德层面。道德自觉的法官既可在司法程序中维护法律的确定性,又能引领社会的变迁。法官、公众以及法律三者的道德价值取向,在实质内涵上都以公民基本权利和自由为根本。崇敬权利价值是法官道德信念的极致,是法官个人道德和职业道德的升华。法官是现代法治社会道德共同体的守望者。     

Enhancing judicial skills in domestic violence cases: the development,implementation, and preliminary evaluation of a model US programme

ABSTRACT

The overwhelming number and complexity of domestic violence cases in criminal and family courts has resulted in the development of education programmes to assist judges. There is limited research on judicial education in this area. This paper reviews one such initiative entitled ‘Enhancing Judicial Skills in Domestic Violence Cases’ (EJS) that has been developed and implemented over the last 20 years by the National Judicial Institute on Domestic Violence, a partnership of the US Department of Justice Office on Violence Against Women, National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges and Futures Without Violence. We present findings of a preliminary evaluation of the programme based on the self-reports of 480 judges who had taken the four-day workshop between 2006 and 2010. Overall, judges reported the programme to be engaging and effective. At a six-month follow‐up, most of the judges identified specific benefits and behavior changes in the areas of access to justice, judicial leadership, victim safety, and abuser accountability as a result of participating in the programme. Critical issues in judicial education are highlighted based on the authors’ experiences in the development and implementation of this programme.     

Formation and change in lay evaluations of criminal sentencing

In public opinion polls, a substantial proportion of lay respondents report that judges are too lenient. We examine the factors that contribute to this perceived judicial leniency. The majority of lay respondents in our study said that judges are too lenient in their sentencing of burglary offenders; yet, their own sentencing preferences were more lenient than the required minimum sentence for residential burglary. Our survey and experimental data suggest that citizens' opinions are formed by their inaccurate impressions of the seriousness of actual criminal cases as well as actual judicial sentencing practices. Our experimental research indicates that opinions of judicial leniency can be changed by providing respondents with an example of the typical case that comes before the court. Directions for future research are discussed.We wish to express gratitude to Patti Vea, who, under the supervision of the first author, collected and entered the data from mass transit riders. We are indebted to Judge Warren Wolfson, Court Administrator Jeff Arnold, Chief Judge Harry Comerford, and Judge Frank W. Barbaro and his jury pool officers who gave us permission and assistance in obtaining juror participation for this research. We would like to thank Tom Tyler and Patrick McAnany for their insightful comments on earlier drafts, and editor Ron Roesch and three anonymous reviewers for their helpful suggestions.