Criminal justice stakeholders are strongly concerned with disparities in penalty outcomes. Disparities are problematic when they represent unfounded differences in sentences, an abuse of discretion, and/or potential discrimination based on sociodemographic characteristics. The Article presents an original empirical study that explores disparities in sentences at two levels: the individual case level and the regional level. More specifically, the study investigates upward departures in the United States’ federal sentencing system, which constitutes a guidelines-based structure. Upward departures carry unique consequences to individuals and their effects on the system as they lead to lengthier sentences, symbolically represent a dispute with the guidelines advice, and contribute to mass incarceration. Upward departures are discretionary to district courts and thus may lead to disparities in sentencing in which otherwise seemingly like offenders receive dissimilar sentences, in part because of the tendency of their assigned judges to depart upward (or not). The study utilizes a multilevel mixed model to test the effects of a host of explanatory factors on the issuance of upward departures at the case level and whether those same factors are significant at the group level-i.e., district courts-to determine the extent of variation across districts. The explanatory variables tested include legal factors (e.g., final offense level, criminal history, offense type), extralegal characteristics (e.g., gender, race/ethnicity, citizenship), and case-processing variables (e.g., trial penalty, custody status). The results indicate that various legal and nonlegal factors are relevant in individual cases (representing individual differences) and signify that significant variations across district courts exist (confirming regional disparities). Implications of the significant findings for the justice system are explored. CONTENTS Br. J. Am. Leg. Studies 6(2) (2017), DOI: 10.1515/bjals-2017-0010 © 2017 Melissa Hamilton, published by De Gruyter Open. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 License. * Senior Lecturer in Law & Criminal Justice, University of Surrey School of Law; J.D., The University of Texas at Austin School of Law; Ph.D, The University of Texas at Austin (Criminology/Criminal Justice). The author expresses appreciation for helpful comments on an earlier draft from Benjamin Levin, J.C. Oleson, Anna Roberts and Justin Murray.

中文翻译：

---

量刑差距

刑事司法利益相关者非常关注惩罚结果的差异。当差异代表了毫无根据的句子差异，滥用酌处权和/或基于社会人口统计学特征的潜在歧视时，就会造成问题。本文提出了一项原始的实证研究，该研究探讨了两个级别的句子差异：个人案例级别和地区级别。更具体地说，该研究调查了美国联邦量刑系统中向上偏离的情况，该系统构成了基于指南的结构。向上离开会给个人及其对系统的影响带来独特的后果，因为它们导致更长的刑期，象征性地与准则建议产生纠纷，并导致大规模监禁。向上撤离是地方法院的酌处权，因此可能导致量刑上的差异，在这种情况下，看似罪犯的判决似乎不同，部分原因是他们指派的法官倾向于向上（或不向上）离职。这项研究利用多层次混合模型来检验各种解释性因素对案件层面向上偏离的发出的影响，以及那些相同因素在群体层面（即地区法院）是否重要，以确定差异程度跨地区。测试的解释性变量包括法律因素（例如，最终犯罪级别，犯罪历史，犯罪类型），法外特征（例如，性别，种族/民族，公民身份）和案件处理变量（例如，审判刑罚，羁押状况）。结果表明，各种法律和非法律因素在个别案件中都相关（代表着个人差异），并表明存在地区法院之间的重大差异（证实了地区差异）。探索了重大发现对司法系统的影响。目录Br。J.上午 腿。研究6（2）（2017），DOI：10.1515 / bjals-2017-0010©2017梅利莎·汉密尔顿（Melissa Hamilton），De Gruyter Open出版。该作品已根据知识共享署名-非商业性-NoDerivs 3.0许可获得许可。*萨里大学法学院法律与刑事司法高级讲师；德克萨斯大学奥斯汀法学院法学博士；德克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校博士学位（犯罪学/刑事司法）。作者对本杰明·莱文（Jen。