INEQUALITY IN THE TYPES OF SENTENCES RECEIVED BY NATIVE AMERICANS AND WHITES
Abstract
A comparison of the distribution of the types of sentences imposed on native American offenders and Write offenders by the district courts of a western state reveals that the native American offenders were more likely to receive sentences involving incarceration in the state prison and were less likely to receive sentences which would have allowed them partially to escape stigmatization as a “convicted felon.” The introduction of a number of test factors revealed that these ethnic differences in the sentence received could only slightly be explained by ethnic differences in the kinds of offenses involved or in other differences in the legal and personal background characteristics of the offenders. A number of possible explanations of the discrepancies in the sentencing of native Americans and whites are suggested. However, regardless of the best explanation of these discrepancies, there are reasons to believe that these discrepancies in themselves may have contributed to an increased probability that the native American offenders would engage in future criminal activity and that these offenders would continue to receive harsher sentences than would similar White offenders.
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?
Hall & Simkus (1975) found that Native American defendants were more likely to be incarcerated than whites and that whites received more lenient outcomes such as deferred or suspended sentences.
“They found that Native American defendants were more likely to be incarcerated than whites and that whites received more lenient outcomes such as deferred or suspended sentences.”
From Criminal Justice in Indian Country: A Theoretical and Empirical Agenda (2019) · cites this paper as Hall & Simkus (1975)
Hall & Simkus (1975) argued that such findings implied that state courts saw Native American defendants as a greater risk for future criminality.
“Hall & Simkus (1975) argued that such findings implied that state courts saw Native American defendants as a greater risk for future criminality.”
From Criminal Justice in Indian Country: A Theoretical and Empirical Agenda (2019) · cites this paper as Hall & Simkus (1975)
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Sociological Perspectives on American Indians
Snipp, C. M. (1992) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.so.18.080192.002031 · Cited by 142 · see citing works
Sentencing Native Americans in US Federal Courts: An Examination of Disparity
Franklin, T. W. (2013) · Justice Quarterly · doi:10.1080/07418825.2011.605072 · Cited by 72 · see citing works
Criminal Justice in Indian Country: A Theoretical and Empirical Agenda
Ulmer, J. T., & Bradley, M. S. (2019) · Annual Review of Criminology · doi:10.1146/annurev-criminol-011518-024805 · Cited by 52 · see citing works
- Authors
- HALL, E. L., & SIMKUS, A. A.
- Affiliations
- University of Montana (US)
- Venue
- Criminology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1975-08
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 199-222
- ISSN
- 0011-1384 (ISSN-L)
- 1745-9125
- OpenAlex
- W2102188341
- Cited by
- 67
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 21 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 7.47
- 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
- sentencing disparities, incarceration, recidivism, offender characteristics
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