We examine 70,581 felony court cases filed in Chicago, IL, from 1990–2007. We exploit case randomization to assess the impact of judge assignment and sentencing decisions on the arrival of new charges. We find that, in marginal cases, incarceration creates large and lasting reductions in recidivism among first offenders. Yet, among marginal repeat offenders, incarceration creates only short-run incapacitation effects and no lasting reductions in the incidence of new felony charges. These treatment-impact differences inform ongoing legal debates concerning the merits of sentencing rules that recommend leniency for first offenders while encouraging or mandating incarceration sentences for many repeat offenders. We show that methods that fail to estimate separate outcome equations for first versus repeat offenders or fail to model judge-specific sentencing tendencies separately for cases involving first versus repeat offenders produce misleading results for first offenders.

More on this topic

BFI Working Paper·Oct 1, 2024

Fear and Dreams: Understanding the Non-Institutional Sources of Leader Strategy

Maria Angélica Bautista, Juan Sebastián Galán, James Robinson, Rafael F. Torres, and Ragnar Torvik
Topics: Uncategorized
BFI Working Paper·Sep 24, 2024

On the Identifying Power of Generalized Monotonicity for Average Treatment Effects

Yuehao Bai, Shunzhuang Huang, Sarah Moon, Azeem Shaikh, and Edward J. Vytlacil
Topics: Uncategorized
BFI Working Paper·Sep 24, 2024

Terrorist Propaganda

Travers Barclay Child, Kai Gehring, Sarah Langlotz, Austin Wright, and Rossella De Sabbata
Topics: Uncategorized