NCJ Number
59054
Journal
Hofstra Law Review Volume: 7 Issue: 1 Dated: (FALL 1978) Pages: 89-121
Date Published
1978
Length
33 pages
Annotation
THE PROBABLE CONSEQUENCES OF VARIOUS SENTENCING REFORM STRATEGIES ARE EXAMINED IN THIS LAW REVIEW ARTICLE FROM AN OPERATIONAL OR PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVE.
Abstract
THE MAJOR CONCERNS OF UNWARRANTED SENTENCING DISPARITY AND INDETERMINACY HAVE ENCOURAGED THE PASSAGE OF REFORM LAWS WHICH PROMISE GREATER EQUITY AND MORE DETERMINACY. THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL DISAGREEMENT, HOWEVER, REGARDING THE STRUCTURE AND PROCEDURES MOST LIKELY TO ACHIEVE THE DESIRED GOALS. THERE IS INCREASING AWARENESS IN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE FIELD THAT UNENVISIONED AND UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF REFORM PROPOSALS TOO OFTEN HAVE AGGRAVATED, RATHER THAN MITIGATED, THE PROBLEMS LEADING TO THEIR ENACTMENT. FROM A PRACTICAL PERSPECTIVE, THE DUAL AUTHORITY MODEL FOR SENTENCING IS SUBSTANTIALLY MORE LIKELY TO PRODUCE THE ACTUAL IMPROVEMENT OF SENTENCING PRACTICES. BY INCORPORATING MULTIPLE CHECKS ON DISCRETION, THE DUAL AUTHORITY MODEL ELIMINATES GROSS DISPARITIES IN SENTENCING WITHOUT PRECLUDING THE POSSIBILITY FOR RESPONSE TO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN CIRCUMSTANCES. UNDER SUCH A MODEL, THE JUDGES WOULD DECIDE, PURSUANT TO GUIDELINES, WHETHER TO IMPOSE A FINE, PROBATION TERM, OR JAIL SENTENCE. THE ACTUAL DURATION OF ANY TERM OF IMPRISONMENT WOULD BE DETERMINED BY THE PAROLE AUTHORITY UNDER GUIDELINES AND PRESUMPTIVE DATA PROCEDURES. ALTHOUGH A SINGLE DECISIONMAKING AUTHORITY WOULD APPEAR TO BE MORE ECONOMICAL, THE USE OF DUAL AUTHORITY MAKES THE SYSTEM MORE RESPONSIVE TO THE NEEDS OF PRISON DISCIPLINE, OVERCROWDING, AND THE RIGHTS OF THE INMATES. THE DUAL SYSTEM WOULD BE PREFERRABLE TO THE USE OF A SINGLE SENTENCING COMMISSION AS PROPOSED BY THE 95TH CONGRESS. TABULAR DATA CONCERNING SENTENCING GUIDELINES ARE PROVIDED. FOOTNOTES ARE INCLUDED IN THE TEXT.