This research examines the validity of an integrative theoretical approach that consists of the "liberation hypothesis" and the "focal concerns" perspective to assess the extent racial discrimination is likely to occur in misdemeanor decision making involving less serious cases. We examined decisions involving the prioritizing of cases, the granting of a continuance, conviction, and incarceration in a large county court in a southeastern state. The results fail to provide support for the belief that the likelihood of race effects is increased in cases involving less severity. Race, however, is found to influence misdemeanor decision making directly and indirectly and in interaction with a number of independent variables. The implications of the findings for future research and policy are discussed.A consistent theme in the criminal justice sentencing literature has been concern over the extent that race rather than legal factors predict justice case outcomes. Research indicates that the seriousness of the offense and the defendant's prior criminal record are often most important in explaining a defendant's sentence (

No abstract

No abstract

The utility of structural criminology in explaining societal reaction to criminal events is examined in an analysis of misdemeanor court cases processed in an urban southern jurisdiction. The analysis employs a relational measure of class to discern distinctions in disposition patterns for misdemeanors classified by type of complaining party. Logistic regression is used to consider the influence of a variety of procedural/legal and extralegal variables in predicting case dispositions for individual, corporate, and victimless cases. Results indicate partial support for the premises of structural theory, and the discussion focuses on how the context of criminal court processing may be conditioned by varying degrees of control between victim and offender.

No abstract