NCJ Number
112389
Journal
Pepperdine Law Review Volume: 13 Issue: 4 Dated: (1986) Pages: 965-991
Date Published
1986
Length
27 pages
Annotation
California statutory law allows unlimited consecutive misdemeanor sentences, while multiple felony offenses are generally subject to stringent restrictions on both the consecutive terms that may be imposed and the length of the aggregate term.
Abstract
This situation results in sentencing inequities that allow less serious multiple misdemeanor offenders to be punished more severely than more serious felony offenders. Compounding this anomaly is the difficulty of reviewing multiple maximum consecutive misdemeanor sentences. This difficulty is caused by the complete absence of sentencing guidelines for making the sentencing choice and the absence of any requirements of factors to be considered in making that choice. Additionally, once a nonprobationary sentence has been proposed and commenced, the trial court is without jurisdiction to modify the sentence even if the judge decides the sentence was unduly harsh or otherwise deserving of reconsideration. The felony sentencing scheme has incorporated safeguards to cover these problems. If uniformity and proportionality in sentencing and the elimination of disparity is to be achieved, a reasonable limit must be imposed on the length of aggregate misdemeanor sentences and a mechanism must be provided for review. 120 footnotes.