North Carolina's Determinate Sentencing Legislation - An Evaluation of the First Year's Experience

• NCJ Number: 93221
• Author(s): S H Clarke; S T Kurtz; G F Lang; K L Parker; E W Rubinsky; D J Schleicher
• Date Published: 1983
• Length: 140 pages
• Grant Number(s): 80-IJ-CX-0004
• Sponsoring Agency: North Carolina Governor's Crime Cmssn; National Institute of Justice (NIJ); US Dept of Justice NIJ Pub
• Corporate Author: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Government
• Publication Format: Document
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This study of the first year's impact of North Carolina's new determinate sentencing law (the Fair Sentencing Act) found that it accomplished some of its objectives, i.e., to reduce unjustified variation in felony sentences and to make them more predictable without being more severe.

Abstract

The study examined multiple charging, trial court dispositions, trial court delay, sentencing procedure, probation, consecutive prison terms, commitment of youthful offenders, severity and variation in sentencing, changes in effects on sentencing by type of offense and offenders, and effect on prison population. The study involved interviews with prosecutors, judges, and defense attorneys and data from the following sources: a 12-county sample of court processing, a statewide felony sentence sample, the release cohort, and a statewide sample of dispositions for convicted felons. Critics of the Fair Sentencing Act (FSA) feared there might be wholesale evasion of the statute's policies through charging, dismissal, and plea bargaining practices. Study findings indicate that many of the FSA objectives have been achieved: felony sentencing has become more predictable and perhaps even fairer (in the sense of lessened racial disparity), without widespread efforts to undermine the legislation. 85 footnotes and extensive tabular data.