Prosecuting sexual assault: A comparison of charging decisions in sexual assault cases involving strangers, acquaintances, and intimate partners

By C. Spohn, David Holleran. 2001

256 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

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

Stemming the flow: challenges for policing adult sexual assault with regard to attrition rates and under‐reporting of sexual offences (2010, background): “However, in sexual offence matters decision-making to reduce uncertainty saw prosecutors rely on ‘stereotypes’ about sexual assault and victim behaviour characteristics, and these stereotypical variables were different among different prosecutors (Spohn & Holleran, 2001).”
Prosecutorial Discretion: An Examination of Substantial Assistance Departures in Federal Crack‐Cocaine and Powder‐Cocaine Cases (2007, background): “…1987; Feeney, Dill, & Wier, 1983; Jacoby et al., 1982; Miller, 1969; Nagel & Hagan, 1983; Spohn & Holleran, 2001), and the culpability of the defendant (Albonetti, 1987; Mather, 1979; Miller, 1969; Neubauer, 1974; Schmidt & Steury, 1989; Spohn & Holleran, 2001; Swiggert & Farrell, 1976).”
Prosecutorial Discretion and the Imposition of Mandatory Minimum Sentences (2007, background): “This coincides with recent sentencing studies focused on judicial discretion, which find young Hispanic males in particular to be singled out for more severe punishment (e.g., Kramer and Ulmer 2002; Spohn and Holleran 2000; Steffensmeier and Demuth 2000, 2001).”