Institutionalizing inequality in the courts: Decomposing racial and ethnic disparities in detention, conviction, and sentencing*
Abstract
A significant body of literature has examined racial and ethnic inequalities in sentencing, focusing on how individual court actors make decisions, but fewer scholars have examined whether disparities are institutionalized through legal case factors. After finding racial and ethnic inequalities in pretrial detention, conviction, and incarceration based on 4 years of felony court data (N = 83,924) from Miami‐Dade County, we estimate nonlinear decomposition models to examine how much of the inequalities are explained by differences in criminal history, charging, and for conviction and incarceration, pretrial detention. Results suggest that inequality is greatest between White non‐Latinos and Black Latinos, followed by White non‐Latinos and Black non‐Latinos, ranging from 4 to more than 8 percentage points difference in the probability of pretrial detention, 7–13 points difference in conviction, 5–6 points in prison, and 4–10 points difference in jail. We find few differences between White non‐Latinos and White Latinos. Between half and three‐quarters of the inequality in pretrial detention, conviction, and prison sentences between White non‐Latino and Black people is explained through legal case factors. Our findings indicate that inequality is, in part, institutionalized through legal case factors, suggesting these factors are not “race neutral” but instead racialized and contribute to inequalities in court outcomes.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
This review expands upon previous research that has examined racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in convictions and sentencing, showing that similar disparities also exist during the pretrial stage.
“This expands upon previous research that has examined racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in convictions and sentencing, showing that similar disparities also exist during the pretrial stage (Omori & Petersen, 2020;Paul et al., 2020).”
From A Scoping Review of the Relationships Between Cash Bail, Failure to Appear, Re-Arrest, Health and Well-Being, Race, and Gender (2026) · cites this paper as Omori & Petersen, 2020
Cites
Instruments for Causal Inference: An Epidemiologist's Dream?
Hernán, M. A., & Robins, J. M. (2006) · Epidemiology · doi:10.1097/01.ede.0000222409.00878.37 · Cited by 961 · see citing works
Dobbie, W., Goldin, J., & Yang, C. S. (2018) · American Economic Review · doi:10.1257/aer.20161503 · Cited by 564 · see citing works
Judging Judicial Discretion: Legal Factors and Racial Discrimination in Sentencing
Bushway, S. D., & Morrison Piehl, A. (2001) · Law & Society Review · doi:10.2307/3185415 · Cited by 317 · see citing works
Street Stops and Broken Windows: Terry, Race and Disorder in New York City
Fagan, J., & Davies, G. (2001) · doi:10.2139/ssrn.257813 · Cited by 284 · see citing works
Elliott, M. N., Morrison, P. A., Fremont, A., McCaffrey, D. F., Pantoja, P., & Lurie, N. (2009) · Health Services and Outcomes Research Methodology · doi:10.1007/s10742-009-0047-1 · Cited by 224 · see citing works
Race and disparities in sentencing: A test of the liberation hypothesis
Spohn, C., & Cederblom, J. (1991) · Justice Quarterly · doi:10.1080/07418829100091071 · Cited by 197 · see citing works
White, Black, and Latino Homicide Rates: Why the Difference?
Phillips, J. A. (2002) · Social Problems · doi:10.1525/sp.2002.49.3.349 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Scheadler, T. R., Radney, A., Smith, B. L., Munshi, A., & Cole, E. (2026) · American Journal of Criminal Justice · doi:10.1007/s12103-025-09860-5 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
“This expands upon previous research that has examined racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in convictions and sentencing, showing that similar disparities also exist during the pretrial stage (Omori & Petersen, 2020; Paul et al., 2020).”
- Authors
- Omori, M., & Petersen, N.
- Affiliations
- University of Missouri–St. Louis (US)
- University of Miami (US)
- Corresponding author
- Omori, Marisa
- Venue
- Criminology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2020-09-24
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 678-713
- ISSN
- 0011-1384 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-9125
- OpenAlex
- W3089064781
- Cited by
- 71
- References
- 7
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 13 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 6
- FWCI
- 8.35
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Criminology (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
- Social Sciences › Law › Criminal Justice and Penology
- Social Sciences › Education › Education Discipline and Inequality
- Keywords
- racial disparities in criminal justice, ethnic disparities, pretrial detention, conviction rates, incarceration, sentencing, criminal history, charging decisions, Miami-Dade County
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review