Minnesota Law Review

Up or Out: Why “Sufficiently Reliable” Statistical Risk Assessment Is Appropriate at Sentencing and Inappropriate at Parole

Sentencing judges and parole release authorities are increasingly using statistical risk assessments to guide their decision-making. Risk assessment instruments rely on statistical research and modeling to predict an individual’s chance of recidivating based on information about the individual like age and number of prior arrests. These instruments are subject to serious statistical and legal limitations and these limitations are exacerbated by imperfect use in practice. This Note analyzes the statistical, legal, and practical weaknesses of risk assessment and argues that although risk assessment is a valuable criminal justice tool, its use must be subject to careful oversight. Because the procedural and constitutional protection available to defendants at sentencing is substantially more robust than the protection available to inmates at parole, this Note advocates, in accord with a recent draft of the Model Penal Code, that statistical risk assessment should be used only at sentencing and not at parole. This Note further suggests potential modifications to the Model Penal Code to more carefully balance the potential pitfalls and benefits of the use of risk assessment at sentencing.


:: View PDF

De Novo

  • Case Comment: Bhogaita v. Altamonte

    EVERY DOG CAN HAVE HIS DAY IN COURT: THE USE OF ANIMALS AS DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS Kyle R. Kroll, Volume 100, Online Managing Editor In Bhogaita v. Altamonte, the Eleventh Circuit recently decided whether to allow a dog in the courtroom as a demonstrative exhibit.[1] Although the case presented many serious [...]

  • Revisiting Water Bankruptcy

    REVISITING WATER BANKRUPTCY IN CALIFORNIA’S FOURTH YEAR OF DROUGHT Olivia Moe, Volume 100, Managing Editor This spring, as “extreme” to “exceptional” drought stretched across most of California—indicating that a four-year streak of drought was not about to resolve itself[1]—Governor Jerry Brown issued an unprecedented order to reduce potable urban water [...]

  • Defying Auer Deference

    DEFYING AUER DEFERENCE: SKIDMORE AS A SOLUTION TO CONSERVATIVE CONCERNS IN PEREZ v. MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSOCIATION Nicholas R. Bednar, Volume 100, Lead Articles Editor* On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association.[1] The Court overturned the D.C. [...]