Race, Plea, and Charge Reduction: An Assessment of Racial Disparities in the Plea Process

Abstract

With the growing recognition of the salience of prosecutorial discretion, attention to biases in the earlier phases of case processing is increasing. Still, few studies have considered the influence of defendant race and race/sex within the plea process. The present study uses a sample of felony cases to assess the influence of race and race/sex on the mode of disposition, similarities and differences in the factors that predict the likelihood of a plea across race, and potential racial disparities in the plea value received pertaining to a charge reduction. The findings suggest that blacks, and black males in particular, are less likely to plea, and are expected to receive a lower value for their plea. Also, the factors that predict the likelihood of a plea are substantively different across race. Conditioning effects of race and sex are found in the likelihood of a plea and probabilities of a charge reduction.

Keywords:

• race
• plea
• charge reduction
• prosecutorial discretion

Notes

¹ While uncertainty avoidance and causal attribution are two separate theories, Albonetti (1991) combines the two to explain disparities in case processing.

² Albonetti (1992) also evaluates the race-charge reduction relationship but not with regard to the plea process. In her study, the relationship is considered in connection with the initial screening decision and movement from the police booking charge to the prosecutorial charge. In the analyses reported, race does not emerge as a significant predictor.

³ Because of possible recording errors in the public defender’s database, the number of trials (which should represent the population of trials initiated between 2002 and 2010) could be slightly underrepresented.

⁴ We recognize that the case-control sampling design utilized has limitations. Case-control sampling designs are commonly used in medical research when trying to study a disease or outcome that is rare. It is used in the current study to account for the rare occurrence of trials in criminal courts. In this type of sampling it is recognized that the control cases (i.e. the pled cases) should be sampled (a) similarly to the cases with the “disease” (i.e. the trial cases), and (b) in a way that is independent of the exposure (i.e. race). Therefore, one could argue that by sampling only pled cases, and not also cases that were dismissed, diverted, or otherwise disposed, the control sample may not meet the two criteria noted above. In particular, this sample may not be independent of the exposure in that the odds of a dismissal seem to vary by race (Kutateladze et al., 2014). However, the trial and plea cases were both drawn from a sample of closed cases, meaning that before proceeding through either mode of adjudication, there was a certain probability of dismissal. In this respect, the control cases and “disease” cases were sampled similarly. There is likely to be selection bias by not accounting for dismissals, but this bias is not necessarily greater among the sample of pled cases than the sample of trial cases. Overall, the sample may underrepresent blacks, since blacks have higher odds of dismissal (Kutateladze et al., 2014). Prior studies comparing plea to trial cases have similar selection biases (Johnson, 2003; Shermer & Johnson, 2010; Smith, 1986; Ulmer & Bradley, 2006; Ulmer et al., 2010).

⁵ Self-reported employment and income information was available for some of the cases, but these variables were not included as controls due to a substantial amount of missing data. This data indicates an average income of $424 a month (n = 602), with a minimum of $0 a month and a maximum of $3,000 a month, and a 45% employment rate (n = 580). Defendants who want to be represented by a public defender in the circuit studied must complete a financial affidavit to determine if they qualify. Public defenders can be appointed by a judge if (1) the defendant’s income is equal to or less than 200% of the federal poverty guidelines or (2) the defendant is unable to pay for a private attorney without creating a substantial hardship on his/her family. It is for this reason that we believe our analyses largely control for SES. We acknowledge, however, that we do not explicitly control for income, education, and employment in the analyses, and therefore cannot completely eliminate their confounding effects on the race-plea and race-charge reduction relationship.

⁶ We cannot determine with absolute certainty that some of the defendants identified as white were of another race/ethnicity (including Hispanics, American Indians, Alaska Natives, Asians, Native Hawaiians, other Pacific Islanders, and others).

⁷ A model VIF of 1.34 and individual VIFs of less than 1.70 suggest that there is not problematic multicollinearity.

⁸ All of the models were re-analyzed including controls for the year of the case. The year 2005 was used as the reference category, since there was an update in the sentencing laws in that year. The results were substantively similar to those reported, except that the findings show white males getting a slightly better value for their plea than white females.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Christi Metcalfe

Christi Metcalfe, PhD, is an assistant professor in the Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice at the University of South Carolina. Her research interests include criminal courts, developmental/life course criminology, punitive attitudes, and quantitative methods.

Ted Chiricos

Ted Chiricos is William Julius Wilson professor of Criminology and Criminal Justice at Florida State University. His current research interests focus on the effects of race, immigration, age, and social threat on justice outcomes as well as the various factors contributing to the extraordinary punitiveness of American culture. He is also collaborating on the examination of threat-related factors that may contribute to intimate partner violence.