The Effect of Judges’ Profiles on Sentencing Drug Trafficking

Abstract This article investigates the effect of the decision maker’s profile on sentencing drug-trafficking cases. Based on habeas corpus from defendants under pretrial custody for drug trafficking sentenced by a subnational criminal court in Brazil, favorable and non-favorable decisions were examined in light of the biographical classifiers of the judges. Variance among votes was analyzed with the aid of decision categories, concerning the application of the legal text, and decision makers’ typologies, concerning background and organizational status. Results show that judges recruited in the state, who attended traditional law schools in the state capital city, with homogeneous careers, are more inclined to repeat the collective orientation of the court: denying the petition. However, decision makers from diverse regional backgrounds, with a non-traditional college education and hybrid professional trajectories have a greater likelihood of exhibiting pro-defendant behavior. Women and substitute judges, whose performance is subject to greater group pressure, are highly unlikely to release custody of an individual facing a drug-related accusation. While focusing on the votes issued by women as opposed to their male counterparts, more attachment to formal requirements of the law was observed; thus, further research on the impact of gender in criminal decision-making is recommended.