Techniques for Reducing Subjective Disparity in Sentencing

• NCJ Number: 108097
• Author(s): A Ashworth
• Date Published: 1987
• Length: 26 pages
• Corporate Author: Council of Europe
• Publication Format: Document
• Publication Type: Legislation/Policy Description
• Language: English
• Country: France
• Note: A paper presented at the Council of Europe's Eighth Criminological Colloquium on the causes and solutions for sentencing disparities.

Annotation

This report considers some of the legislative, judicial, and other techniques for reducing 'subjective' sentencing disparity which have already been introduced in some member states of the Council of Europe.

Abstract

'Subjective' sentencing disparity involves deviations from the ideal sentencing pattern in a given jurisdiction, whether or not sentencing is based in offenders' rehabilitative needs or in offense severity and offender culpability. Techniques for reducing sentencing disparity include the self-regulation of judicial discretion, legislative orientation for sentencing policy, and guideline systems. Judicial discretion regulated by the courts themselves involves courts of appeals' rendering decisions and guidelines intended to advise all judges on sentencing principles. The orientation of sentencing policy through legislation consists of statutory mandates that specify the aims of sentencing, aims with which judges are to comply. Sentencing guidelines originate from statutorily mandated sentencing commissions which set sentencing policy. Examples include presumptive sentencing systems, the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines System, U.S. Federal guidelines, and the proposals of the Canadian Sentencing Commission. Regardless of which technique is used for reducing subjective sentencing disparity, judges must be trained to comply with the technique. 33 footnotes and 29-item bibliography.