Abstract
Abstract Sentencing guidelines are designed with the intention of reducing sentencing disparity. This study examines Ohio's felony sentencing guideline to determine if it allows enough scope for the intrusion of probation officers’ ideological leanings into its scoring. The analysis revealed that conservative officers scored the guidelines more severely than did liberal officers. This was true for actual cases and for standard fictitious cases. This appeared to be the result of different interpretations of guideline categories which are ambiguous rather than consciously discriminatory practices. Furthermore, offenders processed by conservative officers received significantly harsher sentences than did offenders processed by liberal officers. Suggestions for removing sources of ambiguity in the guideline are offered.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
