Intermediate Sanctions in Sentencing Guidelines

Front Cover
DIANE Publishing, 1997 - Political Science - 56 pages
0 Reviews
Sentencing guidelines & intermediate sanctions are two of the most significant criminal justice policy developments in recent decades. Half the States have adopted or considered statewide guidelines; & in early 1997, sentencing commissions were at work in more than 20 States. Intermediate sanctions have proliferated since 1980. This report describes separately the past 20 years of the respective policy & research developments of sentencing guidelines & intermediate sanctions; & the modest efforts, to date, to combine the two. Includes suggestions of next steps that policymakers might consider. Tables & figures.

What people are saying - Write a review

We haven't found any reviews in the usual places.

Selected pages

Common terms and phrases

Popular passages

Page 51 - Commission shall insure that the guidelines reflect the general appropriateness of imposing a sentence other than imprisonment in cases in which the defendant is a first offender who has not been convicted of a crime of violence or an otherwise serious offense...
Page 17 - Cole, George F., Barry Mahoney, Marlene Thornton, and Roger A. Hanson. 1987. The Practices and Attitudes of Trial Court Judges Regarding Fines as a Criminal Sanction. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
Page 22 - Dispositional variability for offenders with identical crime seriousness and criminal history scores has been reduced by 45 percent over the variability under the pre-guidelines system.
Page 14 - From Net Widening to Intermediate Sanctions: The Transformation of Alternatives to Incarceration from Benevolence to Malevolence," in Smart Sentencing: The Emergence of Intermediate Sanctions, ed. James M. Byrne, Arthur Lurigio, and Joan Petersilia (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1992), 231. 40. Quoted in Doris L. Mackenzie and Claire Souryal, "A 'Machiavellian' Perspective on the Development of Boot-Camp Prison: A Debate," University of Chicago Roundtable 2 (1995), 435.
Page 16 - Work?" in Smart Sentencing: The Emergence of Intermediate Sanctions, ed. James M. Byrne. Arthur J. Lurigio. and Joan Petersilia (Newbury Park. CA: Sage. 1992). Marc Renzema. "Home Confinement Programs: Development. Implementation, and Impact.
Page 23 - However, limitations and inconsistencies in the data available for preguidelines and guidelines offenders made it impossible to determine how effective the sentencing guidelines have been in reducing overall sentencing disparity.
Page 43 - This means that, in all but exceptional cases such as those in which the defendant has provided substantial assistance to the government in the investigation or prosecution of...
Page 2 - However, failure to deal with overcrowding attracts the attention of the federal courts, and throughout the 1990s as many as forty states have been subject to federal court orders related to overcrowding. Intermediate sanctions have been seen as a way both to reduce the need for prison beds and to provide a continuum of sanctions that satisfies the just deserts concern for proportionality in punishment.
Page 8 - In most programs, close surveillance of offenders after completion and release produces rates of technical violations and revocations that are higher than for comparable offenders in less intensive programs. The news is not all bad. Back-end programs to which imprisoned offenders are transferred by corrections officials for service of a 90- or 180-day boot camp sentence in lieu of a longer conventional sentence do apparently save money and prison space, although they, too, often experience high failure...
Page 14 - RC (1994). Boot Camps for Adult and Juvenile Offenders: Overview and Update. National Institute of Justice Research Report. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

References to this book

Bibliographic information