司法错误,犯罪威慑和上诉:来自美国联邦法院的证据

Roee Sarel
{"title":"司法错误,犯罪威慑和上诉:来自美国联邦法院的证据","authors":"Roee Sarel","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2739674","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper seeks to empirically examine how the accuracy of a multi-tier adjudication system affects crime deterrence. An ongoing scholarly debate regarding the effects of judicial errors on deterrence provides mixed arguments, but the role of a multi-tier system - where errors can be corrected on appeal - has been mostly overlooked. Analyzing appeal results from U.S federal courts and corresponding crime rates, I find that error occurrence, reflected by affirmance rates, decreases deterrence. Error correction, conversely, entails a complex effect: reversals increase deterrence, but remands decrease deterrence; which implies a need for theoretical adjustment and judicial caution.","PeriodicalId":339016,"journal":{"name":"CJRN: Criminological Theory (Topic)","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Judicial Errors, Crime Deterrence and Appeals: Evidence from U.S. Federal Courts\",\"authors\":\"Roee Sarel\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2739674\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper seeks to empirically examine how the accuracy of a multi-tier adjudication system affects crime deterrence. An ongoing scholarly debate regarding the effects of judicial errors on deterrence provides mixed arguments, but the role of a multi-tier system - where errors can be corrected on appeal - has been mostly overlooked. Analyzing appeal results from U.S federal courts and corresponding crime rates, I find that error occurrence, reflected by affirmance rates, decreases deterrence. Error correction, conversely, entails a complex effect: reversals increase deterrence, but remands decrease deterrence; which implies a need for theoretical adjustment and judicial caution.\",\"PeriodicalId\":339016,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"CJRN: Criminological Theory (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"CJRN: Criminological Theory (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2739674\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CJRN: Criminological Theory (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2739674","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

本文旨在实证检验多层次审判制度的准确性如何影响犯罪威慑。正在进行的关于司法错误对威慑的影响的学术辩论提供了各种各样的论点,但多层系统的作用-错误可以在上诉中得到纠正-大多被忽视了。分析美国联邦法院的上诉结果和相应的犯罪率,我发现错误的发生,反映在确认率上,降低了威慑力。相反,纠错会带来复杂的影响:撤销会增加威慑,但发回会降低威慑;这意味着需要进行理论调整和司法谨慎。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Judicial Errors, Crime Deterrence and Appeals: Evidence from U.S. Federal Courts
This paper seeks to empirically examine how the accuracy of a multi-tier adjudication system affects crime deterrence. An ongoing scholarly debate regarding the effects of judicial errors on deterrence provides mixed arguments, but the role of a multi-tier system - where errors can be corrected on appeal - has been mostly overlooked. Analyzing appeal results from U.S federal courts and corresponding crime rates, I find that error occurrence, reflected by affirmance rates, decreases deterrence. Error correction, conversely, entails a complex effect: reversals increase deterrence, but remands decrease deterrence; which implies a need for theoretical adjustment and judicial caution.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信