Objectives <p>This study examined how a mock defendant’s exposure to genetic and environmental risk factors shapes public sentencing judgements using an experimental survey design.</p> Methods <p>1,668 survey participants were randomly assigned to one of eight vignette conditions. Participants received one of four possible background scenarios describing the defendant’s risk exposure (no-risk, genetic risk, environmental risk, or both risks) and were informed about the defendant’s most recent offense (burglary or armed robbery).</p> Results <p>Participants were more likely to recommend incarceration for defendants described as having been exposed to genetic risk factors, but less likely to do so for those exposed to environmental risk factors, compared to those exposed to no risks. A moderation analysis found no conditioning effect of crime type.</p> Conclusions <p>Results suggest that genetic risk may be viewed by the public as an aggravating factor, while environmental risk may be seen as a mitigating factor. Implications are discussed.</p>