NCJ Number
169229
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 87 Issue: 2 Dated: (Winter 1997) Pages: 583-603
Date Published
1997
Length
21 pages
Annotation
In the context of two recent cases that involved claims of racial disparities in drug offense sentencing, this paper illustrates how a fuller use of statistical techniques applied to the data might have strengthened the claims of the defendants.
Abstract
The cases examined are Stephens v. State (Georgia, 1995) and U.S. v. Armstrong (U.S. Supreme Court, 1996). Using the statistical tools suggested by the author, this paper shows that in the "Stephens" case the noticeable racial disparity in sentencing for drug offenses does not appear to be fully explicable on grounds other than race. In the "Armstrong" case, the data cited by Justice Stevens appears to be much stronger evidence of a racial disparity in the treatment of drug offenders than the small study introduced by the defendants. Although the sample size, 24 in the defendants' study, is relatively small, the fact that all 24 individuals prosecuted were black implies that the data were as extreme as possible. An advantage of sampling is that it reduces the burden on State and Federal governments while enabling defendants who have produced some credible evidence of selective prosecution, perhaps based on a small study, to pursue their claim. This should achieve the goal of more liberal criminal discovery advocated by some commentators, while requiring the defendants to produce some support for their claim and preventing defendants from flooding the prosecutors with requests for large numbers of files. 106 footnotes