Abstract

http://ssrn.com/abstract=2192234
 
 

Footnotes (164)



 


 



Putting Desert in Its Place


Christopher Slobogin


Vanderbilt University - Law School

Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein


Vanderbilt University, Peabody College

December 18, 2012

Stanford Law Review, Vol. 65, p. 1, January 2013
Vanderbilt Law and Economics Research Paper No. 12-39
Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper No. 12-46

Abstract:     
Based on an impressive array of studies, Paul Robinson and his coauthors have developed a new theory of criminal justice, which they call “empirical desert.” The theory asserts that, because people are more likely to be compliant with a legal regime that is perceived to be morally credible, a criminal justice system that tracks empirically derived lay views about how much punishment is deserved is the most efficient way of achieving utilitarian goals, or at least is as efficient at crime prevention as a system that focuses solely on deterrence and incapacitation. This Article describes seven original studies that test the most important hypotheses underlying empirical desert theory. The authors’ conclusions, which throw doubt on much of empirical desert theory, include the following: (1) while consensus on the ordinal ranking of traditional crimes is relatively strong, agreement about appropriate punishments — which arguably is the type of agreement empirical desert requires in order to work — is weak; (2) the relationship between people’s willingness to abide by the law and the law’s congruence with their beliefs about appropriate punishment is complex and not necessarily positive; further, any noncompliance that results from the law’s failure to reflect lay views about desert is probably no greater than the noncompliance triggered by a failure to follow lay views about the role utilitarian goals should play in fashioning criminal dispositions; (3) while the relative crime control benefits of a desert-based system and a prevention-based system are hard to evaluate (and are not directly examined here), people are willing to depart from desert in cases that do not involve the most serious crimes if they believe that preventive goals can be achieved in some other way. The Article ends by discussing the implications of these findings for criminal justice policy, especially with respect to determinate and indeterminate sentencing.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 60

Keywords: just desert, sentencing, punishment, empirical desert, preventive justice

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: December 22, 2012  

Suggested Citation

Slobogin, Christopher and Brinkley-Rubinstein, Lauren, Putting Desert in Its Place (December 18, 2012). Stanford Law Review, Vol. 65, p. 1, January 2013; Vanderbilt Law and Economics Research Paper No. 12-39; Vanderbilt Public Law Research Paper No. 12-46. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2192234

Contact Information

Christopher Slobogin (Contact Author)
Vanderbilt University - Law School ( email )
131 21st Avenue South
Nashville, TN 37203-1181
United States
Lauren Brinkley-Rubinstein
Vanderbilt University, Peabody College ( email )
United States
Feedback to SSRN


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 724
Downloads: 135
Download Rank: 120,278
Footnotes:  164
People who downloaded this paper also downloaded:
1. Crime, Punishment, and the Psychology of Self-Control
By Rebecca Hollander-blumoff

© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright   Contact Us
This page was processed by apollo3 in 0.500 seconds