The sentencing of emerging adult offenders: The impact of youthfulness on sentence departures

Purpose: This paper explores whether or not offenders in the stage of “emerging adulthood”, defined by brain science as the period between 18 and 25 are sentenced differently than older adults. While brain science suggests these individuals have reduced cognitive capacity and may benefit from leniency, sentencing theory suggests that because of this reduced decision-making capacity they may be seen as more dangerous by judges and therefor receive more severe sentences. Methods: We use data from the Pennsylvania Commission on Sentencing from 2015 through 2019 to assess whether judges' sentence these offenders within the recommended guideline range that is age blind or provided either mitigated or aggravated sentencing. Results: Our findings show that this time of life is impactful for sentencing but perhaps not in the way brain science would suggest. Rather than these emerging adults receiving mitigated sentences, they are more likely to receive harsher sentences than older adults. Conclusions: We conclude that in the absence of policy to acknowledge this stage of life and its particular potential for rehabilitation, young offenders will continue to be sentences in disparate ways.