Determinate Sentencing and the Correctional Process - A Study of the Implementation and Impact of Sentencing Reform in Three States - Executive Summary

• NCJ Number: 96333
• Author(s): L Goodstein
• Date Published: 1984
• Length: 79 pages
• Grant Number(s): 80-NI-AX-0006
• Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ); US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
• Corporate Author: Pennsylvania State University
• Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/; NCJRS Photocopy Services
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America
• Note: National Institute of Justice - Executive Summary

Annotation

The research summarized in this report concludes that determinate sentencing in three States -- Illinois, Connecticut, and Minnesota -- had minimal impact on prisoners' attitudes and behaviors.

Abstract

Data were collected between April 1981 and September 1982 and involved interviews with prison administrators, staff, prisoners, and selected central office personnel. Self-report questionnaires were completed by a random sample of 1,654 inmates. Proponents of determinate sentencing claim that it increases equity and predictibility. The study found that determinate-sentenced inmates did feel they were treated more equitably in the sentencing process and were more certain of their release dates. This finding suggests that determinate sentencing also should positively affect inmates' adjustment to prison. However, using scales of prisonization, identification with staff, and isolation from other inmates, the study found no support for this theory. The analysis also failed to find any effects of determinacy on inmate stress or inmate conflict and misconduct. Determinate-sentenced inmates at all prisons participated in fewer rehabilitation programs than inmates serving indeterminate sentences, although the difference was small. Tables and approximately 100 references are supplied.