• How much do mandatory minimums matter? - Journal of Law, Economics and Organization (JLEO)

Abstract: Mandatory minimum sentencing is frequently identified as a driver of long sentences among federal drug offenders, but estimating its causal impact is complicated by prosecutorial discretion in charging. First, I show evidence of selective manipulation of mandatory minimum eligibility, with prosecutors disproportionately choosing minority defendants for eligibility relative to comparable white defendants. This selection behavior creates bias in naive estimates of mandatory minimum effects on sentence length. To recover the causal impact of mandatory minimum eligibility, I use a regression discontinuity design with extrapolation that disentangles statutory effects from prosecutorial selection. I find that eligibility increases sentence length by approximately 10 months (14%) uniformly across case types, with no discernible heterogeneity across race. Together, these results indicate that racial disparities in mandatory minimum sentencing arise primarily from prosecutorial charging decisions rather than from features of the statute itself.

Journal Link, Working Paper Link

• Unintended consequences of constraining discretion: Evidence from criminal sentencing (with Andy Yuan)

Abstract: We study how institutional reforms may produce unintended consequences through behavioral responses by public officials in the context of criminal sentencing. We find that a reform constraining judicial and prosecutorial discretion led to an unexpected 2-month sentence increase despite a 30% reduction in sentence enhancements. This discrepancy between mechanical and realized effects suggests behavioral adjustment by prosecutors and/or judges. We find no evidence of prosecutorial adjustment across thirteen charging and bargaining outcomes. Instead, judges drive the effect with an asymmetric response: lenient judges increase sentences within the remaining sentencing guideline while strict judges reduce them, compressing the distribution of punishment.

PDF Link,  Online Appendix 

• When states restrict traffic stop authority: Evidence on policing and road safety (with Jacob Meyer)

Abstract: We study how changing the legal scope of police authority affects police behavior and public safety. We examine two statewide reforms in Oregon and Virginia that prohibited officers from initiating certain equipment-related traffic stops. Using administrative records and a synthetic difference-in-differences design, we find that both laws reduce traffic stops by 16–17 percent, driven by 45–64 percent declines in equipment-related stops. We find no evidence that officers shift to other stop justifications or that motor vehicle accidents increase. Reductions in traffic stop activity accrue slightly more to non-White drivers in Virginia, and slightly more to White drivers in Oregon. Stop reductions were broad, but slightly higher among agencies that disproportionately utilized equipment-related stops against non-White drivers during the pre-period, especially in Virginia. Our findings show that legislatures can substantially reduce police-civilian interactions by changing the legal scope of stop-initiation authority, with limited evidence of behavioral substitution or roadway-safety costs.

PDF Link 

• Prosecutorial discretion and outcome disparities (With Andy Yuan) - R&R at American Law & Economics Review (ALER)

Abstract: We examine the causal effects of prosecutors' incentives on racial and gender disparities. Blakely v. Washington 542 U.S. 296 (2004) significantly disincentivized state prosecutors from pursuing sentence enhancements by raising their burdens of proof from "preponderance of evidence'' to "beyond a reasonable doubt.'' Through a regression discontinuity design, we find that a higher burden of proof reduces defendants' likelihood of receiving a sentence enhancement by 47%. Furthermore, we find striking evidence that Blakely eliminated the entire preexisting gender gap of men being 24% more likely to receive sentence enhancements than women. However, we find no evidence suggesting a racial gap of sentence enhancements both pre and post Blakely.

PDF Link

• Mandatory minimum repeal and prosecutorial leverage (with Adam Soliman)
  
  

• Untitled community courts paper (with David Mitre Becerril and Mohamad Alkadry)
  
  

• Prosecutor tradeoffs and race: evidence from a circuit split
  
  

• Physical environment and crime: evidence from streetlight modernization (resting)