“You Know Baseball? 3 Strikes”: Understanding Racial Disparity with Mixed Methods for Probation Review Hearings

Danielle M Romain Dagenhardt

doi:10.3390/socsci10060235

Danielle M Romain Dagenhardt

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci10060235

Copy DOI

Journal: Social Sciences	Publication Date: Jun 20, 2021
Citations: 3	License type: CC BY 4.0

Affiliation: University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee

Abstract

Prior literature on judicial decision-making post-sentencing is relatively scarce, yet with the growth of problem-solving courts and offenders placed on probation, judges are responsible for overseeing compliance of offenders beyond traditional decision-making points. More recently, scholars have called for more nuanced methods of examining judicial decision-making, disparity, and attribution than traditional quantitative methods. This study examines the factors that influence judicial sanctioning of probationers for non-compliance in a domestic violence court. The following research questions are examined: Which factors predict whether a probationer is sanctioned for non-compliance? What are the discourses utilized to frame these violations? Are there differences in discourses utilized based upon a probationer’s race? This study combines participant observation of probation review hearings with agency records for a mixed-methods examination of which factors influence the decision to sanction non-compliant probationers, and whether differences emerge based on race. The sample included 350 cases of probation review hearings with 100 cases selected for critical discourse analysis. Results demonstrated that drug use, missed treatment sessions, gender, race, and family status influenced sanctioning decisions. Qualitative results demonstrated that judges evaluate probationers based upon contextual information, which at times relies on racial discourses of drug use and responsibility.

Highlights

Much of the research on racial disparity in the court process has focused on sentencing (e.g., Feldmeyer and Ulmer 2011; Ulmer et al 2016) and pretrial release (e.g., Freiburger and Hilinski 2010; Wooldredge 2012)
Most probationers were jailed for 1–3 days (50.6%) and 71.08% were jailed for one week or less, demonstrating the variable is skewed
It examined whether racial disparity exists in jail sanctions for non-compliance and whether the discourses drawn upon to make sense of non-compliant acts are different depending on probationer race

Summary

Introduction

Much of the research on racial disparity in the court process has focused on sentencing (e.g., Feldmeyer and Ulmer 2011; Ulmer et al 2016) and pretrial release (e.g., Freiburger and Hilinski 2010; Wooldredge 2012). Fewer studies have examined decisions made postconviction at probation review hearings (e.g., Tapia and Harris 2006) or in non-traditional courts, which have grown in popularity in the recent past (e.g., Arabia et al 2008; Ray and Dollar 2013; Snedker et al 2017). In these settings, judges often have more information provided to them about the defendant, few restrictions curbing their discretion, and a variety of possible sanctions (i.e., punishment) for non-compliant behavior (e.g., verbal reprimand, increased supervision, jail). Some studies have examined whether there are racial differences in recidivism and technical violations

Methods

Results

Conclusion