NCJ Number
130247
Date Published
1991
Length
51 pages
Annotation
This chapter examines the nature of and issues associated with three models of sentencing: the legislatively fixed model, the judicially fixed model, and the administratively fixed model.
Abstract
Under the legislatively fixed model, the legislature determines that conviction for a given crime warrants a given term of imprisonment. In the judicially fixed model, the legislature determines the general range of imprisonment for a given crime, and judges determine the precise sentence based on the particular circumstances of the crime at issue. Under the administratively fixed model, the legislature sets a wide permissible range of imprisonment for a given crime, the judge imposes a narrower range, and then a correctional administrative body determines the actual duration of the sentence while the offender is serving the sentence. A discussion of judicial sentencing focuses on the justice and injustice of judicial discretion in sentencing decisions, factors in the choice of sentence, and other actors in judicial sentencing. The other actors in judicial sentencing include the probation officer, who prepares the presentence report; the prosecutor, who influences sentencing through charge selection and plea bargaining; and the defense attorney, who typically presents factors designed to mitigate the sentence. A discussion of issues in sentencing by correctional authority addresses the history of the indeterminate sentence, the California experience with indeterminate sentencing, parole prediction, and factors in the wane of indeterminate sentencing in the United States since 1970. An examination of sentencing by the legislature considers discretion and disparity in such sentencing, expanding prosecutorial power, sentencing guidelines, and legislative sentences in action. 10 recommended readings and discussion questions