NCJ Number
81531
Date Published
1982
Length
51 pages
Annotation
This summary examines determinate sentencing in three county criminal courts -- San Bernardino, San Francisco, and Santa Clara -- and the effects on incarceration rates, plea bargaining, and judicial discretion.
Abstract
The study, focusing on robbery and burglary cases brought before the three jurisdictions from 1974-78, is based on interviews with courtroom participants, observations of plea bargaining sessions, and data from the California Bureau of Criminal Statistics. Rates of prison incarceration had begun to increase in all three counties prior to the law's implementation; increases in jail populations likewise cannot be attributed to the law's passage because the law does not address jail terms. The increase in rates of incarceration may reflect a trend toward increased punitiveness by the courts and the legislature. Determinate sentencing apparently does not lead to an increase in guilty pleas, nor does it lead defendants to plead guilty more quickly, contrary to the expectations of courtroom participants. Although the law gives judges, prosecutors, and district attorneys more influence over sentencing as opposed to the parole board, differences among the three counties make it difficult to say whether the balance of sentencing power has decisively shifted. Probation disqualifiers and enhancements have been integrated into the plea-bargaining process and have become the object of presentence negotiations. The ambiguous results of the determinate sentencing law may imply that the legislative coalition responsible for its passage will fragment; some form of indeterminate sentencing may be reintroduced. Graphs illustrate rates of incarceration and guilty pleas; tabular data are included. For the full report, see NCJ 82726.