NCJ Number
61821
Journal
Hofstra Law Review Volume: 7 Issue: 1 Dated: (FALL 1978) Pages: 29-56
Date Published
1978
Length
28 pages
Annotation
TRENDS IN SENTENCING REFORM DESIGNED TO ACHIEVE SENTENCE UNIFORMITY ARE CRITIQUED.
Abstract
A SENTENCING CODE PREMISED ON THE TOTAL INEFFECTIVENESS OF REHABILITATION AND PUNISHMENT AS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF SENTENCING MAY UNDERMINE THE VALUE OF WELL-TRAINED TREATMENT STAFFS AND SOUND TREATMENT PROGRAMS. LOWER BUT DISPARATE SENTENCES ARE PREFERABLE TO HIGHER BUT EQUAL SENTENCES. NEW STATE SENTENCING CODES INTENDED TO CREATE SENTENCING EQUALITY ARE LIKELY TO PROVIDE HIGHER UNEQUAL SENTENCES TO REPLACE LOWER UNEQUAL SENTENCES. DISCRETIONARY RELEASE OF OFFENDERS BY PRISON DISCIPLINE COMMITTEES, BASED ON 'GOOD TIME' CREDIT, IS NOT AN IMPROVEMENT OVER THE PAROLE SYSTEM, SINCE REASON AND EXPERIENCE DICTATE THAT SUCH COMMITTEES WILL ACT AT LEAST AS ARBITRARILY AS PAROLE BOARDS. UNDER THE NEW DETERMINATE SENTENCING STRUCTURES, UNCONTROLLED JUDICIAL SENTENCING DISCRETION MAY WELL BE REPLACED BY UNCONTROLLED PROSECUTORIAL SENTENCING DISCRETION, DUE TO PROSECUTORS' POWER OVER THE CHARGING PROCESS AND THE PREVALENCE OF PLEA BARGAINED SENTENCES. THE RESULT MAY BE A NET INCREASE IN THE CAPRICIOUSNESS AND DISPARITY IN SENTENCES SERVED. SENTENCING COMMISSIONS, PARTICULARLY AS FASHIONED BY THE PROPOSED FEDERAL CRIMINAL CODE, ARE A POTENTIALLY ATTRACTIVE SOLUTION TO THE PROBLEM OF DISPARITY; HOWEVER, SENTENCING COMMISSIONS MAY INCREASE INCARCERATION LEVELS UNLESS THE MAXIMUM SENTENCING TERMS ARE REDUCED AND COMMISSIONS ARE AUTHORIZED TO IMPOSE THE LEAST OPPRESSIVE SENTENCE. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)