BILEVEL DISPARITIES IN COURT DISPOSITIONS FOR INTIMATE ASSAULT

By J. Wooldredge, Amy Thistlethwaite. 2004

106 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Health, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/20a15c88bde561b7acf999c3c5133f72bbc959a9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Health

1. Brian David Johnson
2. Jeffery T. Ulmer
3. D. Mears
4. S. Bushway
5. Xia Wang
6. L. Slocum

In Sociology and Political Science

1. Jeffery T. Ulmer
2. D. Mears
3. Xia Wang
4. Brian David Johnson
5. S. Bushway
6. James Eisenstein
7. L. Slocum
8. B. Kutateladze

Citations in the corpus

• Prosecutorial Discretion and the Imposition of Mandatory Minimum Sentences (2007, background): “…of hierarchical linear and logistic models with multilevel sentencing data are now well established and have been discussed in detail elsewhere (Britt 2000; Fearn 2005; Johnson 2006; Kautt 2002; Ulmer and Johnson 2004; Weidner, Frase, and Schultz 2005; Wooldredge and Thistlethwaite 2004).”
• Opening Pandora’s Box: How Does Defendant Race Influence Plea Bargaining? (2016, background): “…examined this issue, most have focused on the decision to file initial charges (Baumer, Messner, & Felson, 2000; Beichner & Spohn, 2005; Frazier & Haney, 1996; Spears & Spohn, 1996) or to subsequently dismiss charges (Albonetti, 1987; Franklin, 2010; Myers, 1982; Wooldredge & Thistlethwaite, 2004).”
• Is the Magic Still There? The Use of the Heckman Two-Step Correction for Selection Bias in Criminology (2007, background): “An increasing number of studies have also begun to use the Heckman approach to examine outcomes across multiple stages of criminal case processing (e.g. Kingsnorth et al. 1998; Leiber and Mack 2003; Spohn and Horney 1996; Wooldredge and Thistlewaite 2004).”
• Trial Penalties in Federal Sentencing: Extra‐Guidelines Factors and District Variation (2010, background): “Because pretrial detention may disadvantage defendants at sentencing (Demuth, 2003; Demuth & Steffensmeier, 2004; Wooldredge & Thistlethwaite, 2004), we also control for whether the defendant was held in pretrial detention with a dummy variable (1 = detained pretrial).”
• Recent Developments and New Directions in Sentencing Research (2012, unknown): “…rates (e.g. Britt, 2000; Fearn, 2005; Johnson, 2006; Ulmer & Johnson, 2004; Ulmer et al., 2007; Weidner et al., 2004), political climate (Helms, 2009), neighborhood disadvantage (Wooldredge, 2007; Wooldredge & Thistlethwaite, 2004), and local religion (Fearn, 2005; Ulmer, Bader, & Gault, 2008).”
• A Multilevel Test of Minority Threat Effects on Sentencing (2010, background): “These studies have examined such dimensions as racial and ethnic composition, unemployment, crime, and political affiliation (Britt 2000; Fearn 2005; Helms and Jacobs 2002; Johnson 2003, 2005, 2006; Johnson et al. 2008; Kautt 2002; Ulmer and Johnson 2004; Weidner et al. 2004, 2005; Wooldredge 2007; ”