NCJ Number
88827
Journal
Hamline Law Review Volume: 5 Issue: 2 Dated: (June 1982) Pages: 257-270
Date Published
1982
Length
14 pages
Annotation
Overall, the Minnesota sentencing guidelines appear to benefit defendants when consideration is given to plea negotiations, sentencing appeals, criminal history scores, and the defendant's right to refuse probation.
Abstract
Defendants benefit from the sentencing guidelines, because defendants similarly situated in the areas of offense and offender characteristics should be treated similarly. Insofar as the guidelines help achieve this goal, they are a major step forward. Moreover, by introducing greater certainty and predictability into the sentencing process, much of the guesswork involved in determining whether to plead guilty or go to trial has been removed. This is turn creates a degree of honesty in the process that did not previously exist. The major shortcoming of the guidelines is that they do not address the issues involved in probationary sentences. The vast majority of sentences in Minnesota are stayed, and without any guidelines governing the terms that may be imposed on probation, the intended goal of reducing sentencing disparity will not be achieved. The Guidelines Commission should move promptly to promulgate sentencing guidelines for probationary sentences. Fifty-eight footnotes are provided.