Discretion and Disagreement: A Longitudinal Study of Departures Under Presumptive and Advisory Sentencing Guidelines

Abstract

Policy disagreements have been overlooked as a driver of departure in state sentencing guideline systems. The current study uses the relaxation of Michigan’s sentencing guidelines as a case study for investigating how increases in sentencing discretion affect the use of departures. The analysis focuses on sentencing for the highest crime classes as potential sites of policy disagreement. Results reveal a significant increase in the monthly rate of downward departure and growing variability in departure usage under advisory guidelines. Elevated downward departure rates and differences in the likelihood of downward departure by offense type point to judicial disagreement with guideline sentencing recommendations. Patterns in departure are a valuable source of feedback on guidelines that should inform routine modifications.