National Assessment Of Structured Sentencing

Front Cover
DIANE Publishing, Aug 30, 2004 - Political Science - 138 pages
0 Reviews
Presents the findings of the first national assessment of sentencing reforms. This report offers lessons learned in the diverse efforts to structure sentencing over the past two decades. These lessons are offered in the context of a historical perspective of sentencing practices used in the U. S., with a discussions of the issues that led to the structured sentencing movement. They are based on a national survey of existing sentencing practices in the 50 States & the District of Columbia. Sources for further information. Bibliography. Charts & tables.
 

What people are saying - Write a review

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

Common terms and phrases

Popular passages

Page 6 - VIII. Peremptory sentences ought to be replaced by those of indeterminate length. Sentences limited only by satisfactory proof of reformation should be substituted for those measured by mere lapse of time.
Page 52 - The appellate court shall vacate the sentence and remand the case to the sentencing court...
Page 41 - ... (A) to reflect the seriousness of the offense, to promote respect for the law, and to provide just punishment for the offense; (B) to afford adequate deterrence to criminal conduct; (C) to protect the public from further crimes of the defendant; and (D) to provide the defendant with needed educational or vocational training, medical care, or other correctional treatment in the most effective manner...
Page 44 - ... (g) The Commission, in promulgating guidelines pursuant to subsection (a)(l) to meet the purposes of sentencing as set forth in section 3553(a)(2) of title 18, United States Code, shall take into account the nature and capacity of the penal, correctional, and other facilities and services available...
Page 44 - ... penal, correctional, and other facilities and services available, and shall make recommendations concerning any change or expansion in the nature or capacity of such facilities and services that might become necessary as a result of the guidelines promulgated pursuant to the provisions of this chapter. The sentencing guidelines prescribed under this chapter shall be formulated to minimize the likelihood that the Federal prison population will exceed the capacity of the Federal prisons, as determined...
Page ii - US Department of Justice. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the US Department of Justice. The...
Page 41 - The court, in determining the particular sentence to be imposed, shall consider (1 ) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history and characteristics of the defendant...
Page 41 - State's position: (1) Ensure that the punishment for a criminal offense is proportionate to the seriousness of the offense and the offender's criminal history; (2) Promote respect for the law by providing punishment which is just; (3) Be commensurate with the punishment imposed on others committing similar offenses; (4) Protect the public; (5) Offer the offender an opportunity to improve him or herself; and (6) Make frugal use of the state's resources. RCW...
Page 44 - The Commission was also instructed to take into "substantial consideration" two factors: "current sentencing and releasing practices" and "correctional resources, including but not limited to the capacities of local and state correctional facilities".
Page 39 - ... Development of a rational and consistent sentencing policy requires that the severity of sanctions increase in direct proportion to increases in the severity of criminal offenses and the severity of criminal histories of convicted felons.

References to this book

Sentencing Matters

Limited preview - 1998

Bibliographic information