NCJ Number
58471
Date Published
1977
Length
21 pages
Annotation
INDETERMINATE SENTENCING SHOULD BE ABOLISHED, ACCORDING TO THIS ARTICLE, BECAUSE IT IS AN UNJUST BASIS FOR SENTENCING; AND SINCE IT IS PERCEIVED AS BEING UNJUST AND DISCRIMINATORY, IT MITIGATES AGAINST REHABILITATION.
Abstract
THE INDETERMINATE SENTENCE CAN BE DESCRIBED AS A NOBLE EXPERIMENT THAT HAS FAILED. THIS FAILURE IS ACCOUNTED FOR BY THE FACT THAT INDETERMINATE SENTENCING WAS BASED ON APPLICATION OF THE MEDICAL MODEL TO CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. SINCE CRIMINALS WERE CONSIDERED SICK, IT WAS FELT THAT THEY COULD BE TREATED, AND THEIR CURE COULD BE OBSERVED AND SERVE AS THE BASIS FOR RELEASE. THIS PHILOSOPHY, EXPRESSED IN 1847 BY S. J. MAY, BECAME RAPIDLY ACCEPTED. HOWEVER, AFTER DECADES OF EXPERIENCE, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THE MEDICAL MODEL IS APPLICABLE. STRIPPED OF ITS THEORETICAL BASIS, INDETERMINATE SENTENCES SERVE ONLY TO INCREASE THE LENGTH AND DISPARITY OF SENTENCES AND TO BREED INMATE UNREST. WHILE ANY OFFENDER-ORIENTED SENTENCING SYSTEM REQUIRES A GREAT DEAL OF DISCRETION, MOST SYSTEMS OPERATE WITHOUT SPECIFIC LEGAL CRITERIA OR GUIDELINES. SINCE THE 1962 DEVELOPMENT OF THE MODEL PENAL CODE BY THE AMERICAN LAW INSTITUTE, EFFORTS HAVE BEEN UNDERTAKEN TO DEVELOP SUCH GUIDELINES. JUST DESERTS, THE JUSTICE MODEL, AND PRESUMPTIVE SENTENCING ARE EXAMPLES OF MODELS WHICH SEVERELY CURTAIL JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION, MAKE THE PUNISHMENT FIT THE CRIME, MAKE REHABILITATION PROGRAMS VOLUNTARY, AND ALLOW TIME-OFF SENTENCES FOR GOOD BEHAVIOR. A NUMBER OF STATES INCLUDING MAINE, INDIANA, AND CALIFORNIA HAVE ENACTED DETERMINATE SENTENCING PROCEDURES. EXPERIENCE SHOWS THAT THE LENGTH OF TIME SERVED UNDER SUCH A SYSTEM IS EQUAL TO OR LESS THAN TIME SERVED UNDER AN INDETERMINATE SYSTEM. USE OF VOLUNTARY REHABILITATION PROGRAMS NEED NOT MEAN THAT INMATES WILL BE DENIED THE OPPORTUNITY TO PREPARE THEMSELVES FOR SUCCESSFUL REENTRY INTO SOCIETY. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED.