NCJ Number
61826
Journal
Hofstra Law Review Volume: 7 Issue: 2 Dated: (WINTER 1979) Pages: 243-258
Date Published
1979
Length
16 pages
Annotation
GROUNDS FOR SENTENCING REFORM ARE IDENTIFIED, AND THE CURRENT RECIDIVISM RATE, THE EFFECTIVENESS OF REHABILITATION, AND THE VALUE OF PAROLE ARE EXAMINED AS JUSTIFICATIONS FOR SENTENCING REFORM.
Abstract
THE CURRENT SYSTEM OF SENTENCING IN THE UNITED STATES MUST BE REFORMED. NOT ONLY ARE INDIVIDUAL OFFENDERS TREATED DISPARATELY, BUT SENTENCING OF CLASSES OF OFFENDERS, SUCH AS JUVENILES AND ADULTS, DIFFERS RADICALLY WITHIN AND BETWEEN JURISDICTIONS. ALTHOUGH SENTENCING DISPARITY CALLS FOR REFORM, CAUTION MUST BE EXERCISED IN MOUNTING SENTENCE REFORMS BASED ON THE BELIEF THAT THE CURRENT SYSTEM IS TOTALLY INEFFECTIVE IN CONTROLLING REPROCESSING (RECIDIVISM) OF OFFENDERS THROUGH REHABILITATION. A COMPREHENSIVE REVIEW OF RECIDIVISM STUDIES OVER RECENT YEARS SHOWS THAT AN AVERAGE OF ONE OUT OF FOUR OFFENDERS IS REPROCESSED--A LOW RATE. FURTHER, A REVIEW OF EVALUATIVE RESEARCH REGARDING OFFENDER REHABILITATION PROGRAMS DOES NOT REVEAL THAT TREATMENT EFFORTS PER SE ARE INEFFECTIVE, BUT THAT DIFFERENT TYPES OF TREATMENT ARE EFFECTIVE, NEUTRAL, OR HARMFUL IN DEGREES ACCORDING TO THE TREATMENT MILIEU AND TYPE OF OFFENDER. PAROLE AND PROBATION ARE ALSO OPTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SHOWN EFFECTIVE UNDER GIVEN CIRCUMSTANCES. REFORM BASED UPON A CAREFUL READING OF THE EFFECTS OF THE EXISTING SENTENCING SYSTEMS WOULD DICTATE A CAUTIOUS REVISION RATHER THAN A RADICAL UPROOTING OF CURRENT SENTENCING PRACTICES. FOOTNOTES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)