The Federal Judicial Center's 1996 Survey of Guideline Experience

Racial Disparity in Federal Criminal Sentences

“…Judges are not legally bound by the factual stipulations in plea agreements. However, most federal judges report that if the parties have agreed to a particular version of the facts, they typically defer to it, with the result that sentencing fact-finding, too, is to a large degree negotiated in the plea agreement ðGilbert and Johnson 1996;Schulhofer and Nagel 1997Þ. In 2005, the Supreme Court's Booker decision rendered the guidelines merely advisory, potentially weakening prosecutors' sentencing influence. But judges must still consult the guidelines, 7 and Booker did not affect the binding nature of sentencing statutes.…”

“…Legal scholars, judges, and practitioners broadly agree that prosecutorial decisions play a dominant role in determining sentences ðsee, e.g., Gilbert and Johnson 1996;Miller 2004;Stith 2008Þ. In spite of this, prior empirical studies of racial and other demographic disparities in sentencing have considered judicial sentencing decisions only in isolation from the prosecutorial choices that preceded them.…”

Estimating Gender Disparities in Federal Criminal Cases

“…Although judges have independent factfinding authority, in practice they usually defer to the plea agreement's stipulations (Stith 2008;Schulhofer and Nagel 1997;Powell and Cimino 1995). One survey found that 92% of judges said their findings of fact diverge from the plea agreement either "infrequently" or "never" (Gilbert and Johnson 1996).…”