Weighted Dispositions - Adding Quality to Performance Measurement

• NCJ Number: 92951
• Author(s): J E Jacoby; E C Ratledge
• Date Published: 1982
• Length: 28 pages
• Grant Number(s): 80-IJ-CX-0032; 82-IJ-CX-0028
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ); US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
• Corporate Author: Jefferson Institute for Justice Studies
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: Paper presented to the Annual Conference of The American Society of Criminology, Toronto, Canada, November 1982

Annotation

It may be possible to quantify the process prosecutors use to select acceptable minimum sanctions.

Abstract

This paper presents a practical approach which appears to overcome most measurement barriers. It also discusses use of a severity scale for sanctions. Disposition rates, while inadequate as a measurement of output for prosecutors and defense counsel, are in use today because few other measurement alternatives exist. The fact that even unsatisfactory measures are in use suggests a need for a practical means of measurement. The use of a severity scale would indicate the success of prosecution or defense of cases. The methodology in this study consisted of simulation using case histories developed in earlier research. A group of 193 attorneys from 1 prosecutor's office evaluated a range of sanctions. The subsequent analysis examined the average minimum sentence deemed acceptable for each case. Prosecutors do set limits for sanctions, finding some consistently unacceptable. Apparently, it is possible that the process prosecutors use to determine acceptability of sanctions can be quantified. Figures, tables, and seven notes are provided.