“Nickel and Dimed” for Drug Crime

Unpacking the Process of Cumulative Racial Inequality

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

We apply a cumulative disadvantage framework to examine racial inequality in the criminal justice system for drug defendants. Using State Court Processing Statistics data for the period 1990–2006 (N = 34,814), we estimate probit, multinomial probit, and OLS models to examine racial disparities in pretrial detention, adjudication, sentence type, and sentence length. We find that disparities in sentencing are not considerably large, particularly in sentence length. Larger disparities occur earlier in the process, in more discretionary stages, and through indirect pathways. In a criminal justice system that “nickel and dimes” racial inequality, examining this inequality should occur through multiple stages in the court process, rather than at a single stage.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalSociological Quarterly
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Jan 1 2018

Fingerprint

offense
drug
justice
statistics

Keywords

  • courts
  • Cumulative disadvantage
  • racial disparities
  • sentencing

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

@article{b9c07c5136c44d4c8f2ad8999e1163a4,
title = "“Nickel and Dimed” for Drug Crime: Unpacking the Process of Cumulative Racial Inequality",
abstract = "We apply a cumulative disadvantage framework to examine racial inequality in the criminal justice system for drug defendants. Using State Court Processing Statistics data for the period 1990–2006 (N = 34,814), we estimate probit, multinomial probit, and OLS models to examine racial disparities in pretrial detention, adjudication, sentence type, and sentence length. We find that disparities in sentencing are not considerably large, particularly in sentence length. Larger disparities occur earlier in the process, in more discretionary stages, and through indirect pathways. In a criminal justice system that “nickel and dimes” racial inequality, examining this inequality should occur through multiple stages in the court process, rather than at a single stage.",
keywords = "courts, Cumulative disadvantage, racial disparities, sentencing",
author = "Marisa Omori",
year = "2018",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1080/00380253.2018.1526049",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Sociological Quarterly",
issn = "0038-0253",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - “Nickel and Dimed” for Drug Crime

T2 - Unpacking the Process of Cumulative Racial Inequality

AU - Omori, Marisa

PY - 2018/1/1

Y1 - 2018/1/1

N2 - We apply a cumulative disadvantage framework to examine racial inequality in the criminal justice system for drug defendants. Using State Court Processing Statistics data for the period 1990–2006 (N = 34,814), we estimate probit, multinomial probit, and OLS models to examine racial disparities in pretrial detention, adjudication, sentence type, and sentence length. We find that disparities in sentencing are not considerably large, particularly in sentence length. Larger disparities occur earlier in the process, in more discretionary stages, and through indirect pathways. In a criminal justice system that “nickel and dimes” racial inequality, examining this inequality should occur through multiple stages in the court process, rather than at a single stage.

AB - We apply a cumulative disadvantage framework to examine racial inequality in the criminal justice system for drug defendants. Using State Court Processing Statistics data for the period 1990–2006 (N = 34,814), we estimate probit, multinomial probit, and OLS models to examine racial disparities in pretrial detention, adjudication, sentence type, and sentence length. We find that disparities in sentencing are not considerably large, particularly in sentence length. Larger disparities occur earlier in the process, in more discretionary stages, and through indirect pathways. In a criminal justice system that “nickel and dimes” racial inequality, examining this inequality should occur through multiple stages in the court process, rather than at a single stage.

KW - courts

KW - Cumulative disadvantage

KW - racial disparities

KW - sentencing

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85055093600&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85055093600&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1080/00380253.2018.1526049

DO - 10.1080/00380253.2018.1526049

M3 - Article

JO - Sociological Quarterly

JF - Sociological Quarterly

SN - 0038-0253

ER -