Beyond Roth and Hodge: The Perplexities of Sentencing Under the Penal Code

• NCJ Number: 122035
• Journal: Criminal Justice Quarterly Volume: 10 Issue: 1 Dated: (Fall 1989) Pages: 1-44
• Author(s): C M Henderson
• Date Published: 1989
• Length: 44 pages
• Publication Format: Article
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This article examines recent developments in New Jersey sentencing law, focusing on the influence of two recent New Jersey Supreme Court cases and the interpretations given to the different sentencing provisions of the New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice (N.J.S.A.).

Abstract

Special attention is given to the aggravating and mitigating circumstances provisions in N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1, the new sentencing philosophy of the New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice providing for determinate sentencing with specific sentencing ranges established according to the degree of the crime committed, and the impact of State v. Roth and State v. Hodge. The Roth and Hodge cases show a shift in sentencing policy from rehabilitation of the offender to predictable punishment for a specific offense. The New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice limits judicial discretion in sentencing. To avoid appellate modification of its sentencing decision, the trial court should follow the presumptions and guidelines provided in the Code of Criminal Justice and be prepared to give detailed reasons for the sentence imposed. 457 footnotes.