Empirical research has repeatedly focused on the potential existence of sentencing disparities. In particular, a growing number of studies have used multilevel models to quantify the extent that ‘similar’ offences are treated alike in different courts. This reliance on multilevel models has resulted in a natural focus on differences in the mean sentence awarded between courts, with the amount of within group variability generally assumed to be the same in each court. In this paper we show how multilevel models can be extended by allowing the magnitude of within-court differences to be different in each court. This provides a natural framework to connect between-court disparities with the sentencing differences that are thought to originate between judges operating within the same court, particularly in the absence of more fine-grained sentencing data about the judge residing in each case. Focusing specifically on cases of assault sentenced in 2011, we show that there are substantial differences in the range of sentences awarded in different courts, with the range almost twice as large in some courts. We also find that it is those courts that appear to show the traits of more homogeneous sentencing that sentence more harshly, and that offences involving the presence of a weapon or evidence of good character and/or exemplary conduct were associated with higher levels of internal consistency.

中文翻译：

---

在突袭的情况下重新评估量刑决定的一致性：允许庭内不一致

实证研究反复关注量刑差距的潜在存在。尤其是，越来越多的研究使用多层次模型来量化不同法院对“相似”犯罪的对待程度。这种对多层次模型的依赖自然导致人们关注法院之间判给的平均刑罚的差异，通常认为每个法院内群体内部差异的数量是相同的。在本文中，我们展示了如何通过允许每个法院的庭内差异幅度不同来扩展多层次模型。这提供了一个自然的框架，可以将法院之间的差异与量刑差异联系起来，这些差异被认为是同一法院内法官之间产生的，尤其是在每种情况下都没有关于法官的更详细的量刑数据的情况下。我们特别关注于2011年判处的殴打案件，我们发现不同法院判处的判刑范围存在实质性差异，在某些法院，判刑幅度几乎是原来的两倍。我们还发现，正是那些法院似乎表现出更加同质化的量刑特征，使这一判决更加严厉，而且涉及存在武器或品行良好和/或模范行为证据的罪行与更高水平的内部一致性有关。 。在某些法院，范围几乎是原来的两倍。我们还发现，正是那些法院似乎表现出更加同质化的量刑特征，使这一判决更加严厉，而且涉及存在武器或品行良好和/或模范行为证据的罪行与更高水平的内部一致性有关。 。在某些法院，范围几乎是原来的两倍。我们还发现，正是那些法院似乎表现出更加同质化的量刑特征，使这一判决更加严厉，而且涉及存在武器或品行良好和/或模范行为证据的罪行与更高水平的内部一致性有关。 。