NCJ Number
144138
Journal
University of Colorado Law Review Volume: 64 Issue: 3 Dated: (1993) Pages: 723-735
Date Published
1993
Length
13 pages
Annotation
The author contends that a policy of restricting judicial but not prosecutorial discretion is incoherent in the environment of sentencing guidelines and plea bargaining; such a policy concentrates discretion in the hands of a single official and tends to make the benefits of discretion available only to defendants who abandon the right to trial.
Abstract
He suggests that aggregated sentencing, determining sentences for many cases at all once, tends to produce more severe sentences than individualized sentencing. He recognizes, however, that describing the appropriate influence of situational and personal characteristics on punishment is difficult and that sentencing commissions can quantify harm more easily than they can quantify circumstances. Sentencing guidelines do not have to be comprehensive but do need to enhance judicial discretion and fairness. A sentencing commission that has resolved recurring sentencing issues and has provided benchmarks can make a lasting contribution to the quality of criminal justice. Offense-based sentencing guidelines and reforms in Minnesota are discussed. 37 footnotes