NCJ Number
45453
Date Published
1977
Length
58 pages
Annotation
THE PROGRESSION OF SENTENCING, SENTENCING THEORIES AND TRENDS, AND PRAGMATIC APPROACHES TO SENTENCING ARE DISCUSSED AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE ARE MADE.
Abstract
THERE ARE MANY INCONSISTENCIES IN SENTENCING TRENDS. FREQUENTLY TWO PEOPLE CONVICTED OF THE SAME CRIME WILL BE SERVING VERY DIFFERENT SENTENCES. MOST ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED SUGGEST THAT SENTENCING BE MADE UNIFORM THROUGH MANDATORY AND DETERMINATE SENTENCING. OTHER POSSIBILITIES INCLUDE FLAT-TIME SENTENCING, PRESUMPTIVE SENTENCING, AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF SENTENCING GUIDELINES. SENTENCING ON A NATIONAL LEVEL IS DISCUSSED, WITH SPCIAL ATTENTION TO CALIFORNIA, MAINE, MINNESOTA, DENVER, AND PHILADELPHIA. AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION SUGGESTIONS ARE CITED, WITH NEGATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS AGAINST MANDATORY SENTENCING. A DISCUSSION AND OUTLINE OF MANDATORY SENTENCING IS PRESENTED, ALONG WITH THE EXPERIENCES OF THREE STATES: NEW YORK, OKLAHOMA, AND MASSACHUSETTS. THE POLICIES OF SEVERAL OTHER STATES ARE BRIEFLY OUTLINED, WITH A SPECIAL EMPHASIS ON PENNSYLVANIA'S LEGISLATION. PENDING FEDERAL LEGISLATION IS PRESENTED. IN CONCLUSION, THE AUTHOR STATES THAT THERE IS DEFINITELY A PROBLEM WITH SENTENCE DISPARITY, BUT MOST STATES ARE AWARE OF THIS AND ARE NOW ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN STUDIES AND LEGISLATION TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM. HIGHLIGHTS OF LEGISLATION FROM CALIFORNIA AND NEW YORK ARE APPENDED. NOTES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ARE PROVIDED. (BAC)