NCJ Number
58587
Date Published
1976
Length
0 pages
Annotation
THIS VIDEO CASSETTE FROM THE NATIONAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE EXECUTIVE TRAINING PROGRAM IN ADVANCED CRIMINAL JUSTICE PRACTICES INDICATES THE NEED FOR GUIDELINES WHICH STRUCTURE JUDICIAL DISCRETION RATHER THAN REMOVE IT.
Abstract
SENTENCING IS BOTH THE MOST IMPORTANT AND THE MOST DIFFICULT ASPECT OF CRIMINAL ADJUDICATION. THE DISPARITY WHICH TOO FREQUENTLY DISTINGUISHES THE SENTENCES OF SIMILARLY SITUATED OFFENDERS (PERSONS WHO COMMIT THE SAME CRIME) CAN MAKE THE TURMOIL OF SENTENCING EVEN MORE DIFFICULT. DISPARITY AND VARIATION BETWEEN JUDGES CAN BE JUSTIFIED IF THEY RESULT FROM DIFFERING CIRCUMSTANCES AND DEFENDANTS. IF, HOWEVER, THE VARIATIONS IN LENGTH OF SENTENCE OR CONDITION OF PROBATION OCCUR BETWEEN SIMILAR DEFENDANTS, THEN THERE IS CAUSE FOR THE STRUCTURING OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION, PLEA BARGAINING PROCEDURES, AND PROSECUTORIAL DISCRETION. JUDICIAL DISCRETION CAN BE DIRECTED THROUGH THE USE OF JUDICIALLY-CONSTRUCTED GUIDELINES BASED ON THE INTENT OF STATE AND FEDERAL LAWMAKERS AND ON THE USUAL SENTENCES FOR SIMILAR OFFENSES. SURVEYS OF THE SENTENCES PRODUCED BY JUDGES OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT INDICATE A WIDE DISPARITY IN SENTENCES BASED ONLY ON HYPOTHETICAL PRESENTENCING REPORTS. IN RESPONSE TO SUCH VARIATION, LEGISLATURES HAVE ENACTED MANDATORY SENTENCES, WHICH MAY NOT COMPLETELY SERVE THE ENDS OF JUSTICE BY IGNORING MITIGATION. A PREFERRED RESPONSE IS THE GUIDELINES PROGRAM ENACTED IN COLORADO AND ARIZONA WHICH PROVIDES JUDGES WITH RECOMMENDED MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM SENTENCES, BASED ON PREVIOUS OFFENSES OF THE DEFENDANT, PREVIOUS SENTENCES BY THE COURT, AND A LIMITED NUMBER OF ADDITIONAL FACTORS. THE GUIDELINES AID IN QUANTIFYING THE STANDARDS FOR JUDICIAL ACCOUNTABILITY AND IN PROVIDING KNOWN SENTENCES THAT CAN BE DISCUSSED IN PLEA BARGAINING. (TWK).