Plea Discounts or Trial Penalties? Making Sense of the Trial-Plea Sentence Disparities

Shi Yan, Shawn D. Bushway

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

There is a consensus that defendants who plead guilty generally receive less harsh sentences than similarly-situated defendants convicted at trial. However, there is less consensus on how to characterize this disparity in the sentence. Some researchers refer to the disparities as “trial penalties,” whereas others refer to them as “plea discounts.” We contend that the two terms have different theoretical backgrounds and underlying assumptions. As a result, the theories require different modeling strategies, and can lead to different predictions on the relationship between the disparity and some key case characteristics. We start by differentiating the two perspectives theoretically. We then present an empirical analysis on defendants in New York State to substantiate our theoretical arguments. We demonstrate that the estimates of the trial-plea disparities depend on the assumption of the default, as estimates of the trial penalties differed considerably from the estimates of the plea discounts.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1226-1249
Number of pages24
JournalJustice Quarterly
Volume35
Issue number7
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 10 2018

Fingerprint

penalty
Research Personnel

Keywords

  • counterfactual
  • plea bargaining
  • plea discounts
  • Trial penalties

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Pathology and Forensic Medicine
  • Law

Cite this

Plea Discounts or Trial Penalties? Making Sense of the Trial-Plea Sentence Disparities. / Yan, Shi; Bushway, Shawn D.

In: Justice Quarterly, Vol. 35, No. 7, 10.11.2018, p. 1226-1249.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{f2192b0f7d4948cc84a3d9366541ec50,
title = "Plea Discounts or Trial Penalties? Making Sense of the Trial-Plea Sentence Disparities",
abstract = "There is a consensus that defendants who plead guilty generally receive less harsh sentences than similarly-situated defendants convicted at trial. However, there is less consensus on how to characterize this disparity in the sentence. Some researchers refer to the disparities as “trial penalties,” whereas others refer to them as “plea discounts.” We contend that the two terms have different theoretical backgrounds and underlying assumptions. As a result, the theories require different modeling strategies, and can lead to different predictions on the relationship between the disparity and some key case characteristics. We start by differentiating the two perspectives theoretically. We then present an empirical analysis on defendants in New York State to substantiate our theoretical arguments. We demonstrate that the estimates of the trial-plea disparities depend on the assumption of the default, as estimates of the trial penalties differed considerably from the estimates of the plea discounts.",
keywords = "counterfactual, plea bargaining, plea discounts, Trial penalties",
author = "Shi Yan and Bushway, {Shawn D.}",
year = "2018",
month = "11",
day = "10",
doi = "10.1080/07418825.2018.1552715",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "35",
pages = "1226--1249",
journal = "Justice Quarterly",
issn = "0741-8825",
publisher = "Taylor and Francis Ltd.",
number = "7",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Plea Discounts or Trial Penalties? Making Sense of the Trial-Plea Sentence Disparities

AU - Yan, Shi

AU - Bushway, Shawn D.

PY - 2018/11/10

Y1 - 2018/11/10

N2 - There is a consensus that defendants who plead guilty generally receive less harsh sentences than similarly-situated defendants convicted at trial. However, there is less consensus on how to characterize this disparity in the sentence. Some researchers refer to the disparities as “trial penalties,” whereas others refer to them as “plea discounts.” We contend that the two terms have different theoretical backgrounds and underlying assumptions. As a result, the theories require different modeling strategies, and can lead to different predictions on the relationship between the disparity and some key case characteristics. We start by differentiating the two perspectives theoretically. We then present an empirical analysis on defendants in New York State to substantiate our theoretical arguments. We demonstrate that the estimates of the trial-plea disparities depend on the assumption of the default, as estimates of the trial penalties differed considerably from the estimates of the plea discounts.

AB - There is a consensus that defendants who plead guilty generally receive less harsh sentences than similarly-situated defendants convicted at trial. However, there is less consensus on how to characterize this disparity in the sentence. Some researchers refer to the disparities as “trial penalties,” whereas others refer to them as “plea discounts.” We contend that the two terms have different theoretical backgrounds and underlying assumptions. As a result, the theories require different modeling strategies, and can lead to different predictions on the relationship between the disparity and some key case characteristics. We start by differentiating the two perspectives theoretically. We then present an empirical analysis on defendants in New York State to substantiate our theoretical arguments. We demonstrate that the estimates of the trial-plea disparities depend on the assumption of the default, as estimates of the trial penalties differed considerably from the estimates of the plea discounts.

KW - counterfactual

KW - plea bargaining

KW - plea discounts

KW - Trial penalties

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85059947814&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85059947814&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/07418825.2018.1552715

DO - 10.1080/07418825.2018.1552715

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85059947814

VL - 35

SP - 1226

EP - 1249

JO - Justice Quarterly

JF - Justice Quarterly

SN - 0741-8825

IS - 7

ER -