In this scientific poster a study is described that examined court policies applied to alcohol-impaired driving cases for a county in central New York State. The framework of `Social Judgment Theory' was used. Judgment policies were formulated, both for individual judges and for all judges combined, with respect to the specification and integration of factors related to the adjudication of alcohol-impaired charges. Cases included persons aged 21 years and older who were arrested in 1995 or 1996 for alcohol-impaired driving in the county, and whose cases had reached final disposition by the court. An examination of the judgment policies for individual judges indicated substantial variation in the leniency or severity of dispositions, in the relative importance of specific factors, and in the degree to which individual judge's policies are consistent, can be well modeled. While all judges considered prior alcohol-impaired driving convictions in forming their adjudication policies, there were wide differences among judges in the relative importance given to other factors (for instance blood alcohol content, gender). The study concludes that social judgment analysis provides a useful framework for examining the judicial policies applied to alcohol-impaired violations. Since courts vary widely in how factors are weighed in reaching judgments about alcohol-impaired cases, there may be significant differences among courts in the disposition of alcohol violations occurring under the same circumstances and involving drivers with similar characteristics.
Abstract