NCJ Number
103929
Date Published
1986
Length
13 pages
Annotation
Major principles are at work in the current impetus for sentencing reform.
Abstract
An examination of both empirical and experimental evidence reveals considerable judicial discretion and a resultant disparity in sentencing decisions. While some of the justification for discretionary decisions in sentencing stemmed from the rehabilitation model, which assumed that rehabilitation needs would vary by individual case, the rehabilitation model has found support neither in theory nor in practice. A second consideration in sentencing reform has been growing concern with victim's rights. Under the prevailing sentencing system, both the victim and the public are badly misled by the imposed sentence. As a matter of basic fairness, the victim deserves to know what penalty actually is being imposed on and will be served by the convicted offender. Finally, the knowledge of the limitations of the rehabilitation model, have resulted in a reemphasis of traditional criminal justice values of deterrence and incapacitation. These principles can be seen at work in the newly enacted Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. The Act establishes a Federal commission charged with establishing sentencing guidelines, provides for appellate review of sentences falling outside the suggested range, and abolishes paroles and requires that offenders serve their full sentences minus a maximum possible 'good time' credit. 20 notes and references.