Abstract
Determinate sentencing laws enacted in the 1970s and presumptive sentencing guidelines implemented in the 1980s wrought major changes in criminal justice. For most of the twentieth century, an indeterminate system of sentencing held sway in the United States (Rothman, 1980). The key elements of indeterminate systems include (1) wide sentencing ranges with high statutory maximum sentences, such as 10, 20, or 30 years established by the legislature; (2) judicial determination of whether prison or probationary sentence will be imposed in a given case; (3) judicial pronouncement of a largely symbolic sentence duration for prison cases, usually consisting of the high statutory maximum sentence; and (4) administrative control over the actual prison term exercised by a parole board. The structure encouraged the judge and parole board to fashion a sentence to achieve whatever purpose of sentencing (deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation, or punishment) deemed appropriate (von Hirsch, 1976).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
American Friends Service Committee. Struggle for justice. New York: Hill and Wang, 1971.
Blumstein, A., Cohen J., Martin S. E., and Tonry M. H. (Eds.). Research on sentencing: The search for reform. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1983.
Clarke, S. H. Felony sentencing in North Carolina 1976–1986: Effects of presumptive sentencing legislation. Chapel Hill: Institute of Government, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1987.
Cohen, J., and Tonry, M. H. Sentencing reforms and their impacts. In Research on sentencing: The search for reform. Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1983.
Dershowitz, A. Fair and certain punishment. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1976.
Fogel, D. We are the living proof. Cincinnati: W. A. Anderson, 1975.
Frankel, M. E. Criminal sentences: Law without order. New York: Hill and Wang, 1972.
Goodstein, L. A quasi-experimental test of prisoner reactions to determinate and indeterminate sentencing. In N. Parisi (Ed.), Coping with imprisonment. Beverly Hills: Sage, 1982.
Goodstein, L. Sentencing reform and the correctional system: A case study of the implementation of Minnesota’s Determinate Sentencing Law. Law and Policy Quarterly, 1983, 5, 478–501.
Goodstein, L. Determinate sentencing and the correctional process: A study of the implementation and impact of sentencing reform in three states. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1984.
Hepburn, J. R., and Goodstein, L. Organizational imperatives and sentencing reform implementation: The impact of prison practices and priorities on the attainment of the objective of determinate sentencing. Crime and Delinquency, 1986, 32, 3339–365.
Jacobs, J. Sentencing reform by prison personnel: Good time. UCLA Law Review, 1982, 30, 217–270.
Knapp, K. A. Next step: Non-imprisonment guidelines, Perspectives, 1988, 12, 8–10.
Knapp, K. A. Proactive policy analysis of Minnesota’s prison populations. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 1986, 1, 37–57.
Knapp, K. A. Minnesota sentencing guidelines and commentory annotated. St. Paul: Minnesota Continuing Legal Education Press, 1985.
Lipson, A. J., and Peterson, M. A. California justice under determinate sentencing: A review and agenda for research. Prepared for the State of California, Board of Prison Terms, The Rand Corporation, 1980.
Meithe, T. D., and Moore, C. A. Evaluation of Minnesota’s felony sentencing guidelines. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, 1987.
Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines and Commentary. St. Paul: Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission, 1980.
Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission. Preliminary report on the development and impact of the Minnesota sentencing guidelines. St. Paul: Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission, 1982.
Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission. The impact of the Minnesota sentencing guidelines: Three-year evaluation. St. Paul: Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission, 1984.
National Conference of State Legislatures. State Budget Actions in 1987. Denver: National Conference of State Legislatures, 1987.
National Prison Project. Status report—The courts and prisons. Washington, DC: American Civil Liberties Union Foundation, 1987.
New Mexico House of Representatives. HB 136, 1988.
Oregon Legislative Assembly. House Bill 2715, 1987.
Penal Code of California, Sec. 1170 (a) (1).
Petersilia, J. Expanding options for criminal sentencing. R-3544-EMC. Santa Monica: Rand, 1987.
Rothman, D. J. Conscience and convenience: The asylum and its alternative in progressive America. Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1980.
Schuwerk, R. P. Illinois experience with determinate sentencing: A critical reappraisal Part 1: Efforts to structure the exercise of discretion in bargaining for, imposing, and serving criminal sentences. DePaul Law Review, 1984, 33, 631–739.
Schuwerk, R. P. Illinois experience with determinate sentencing: A critical reappraisal Part 2: Efforts to impose substantive limitations on the exercises of judicial sentencing discretion. DePaul Law Review, 1985, 34, 241–407.
Shane-DuBow, S., Brown, A. P., and Olsen, E. Sentencing reform in the United States: History, content, and effect. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1985.
Tonry, M. Sentencing reform impacts. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1987.
Tonry, M. Structuring sentencing. In Crime and justice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988.
von Hirsch, A. Doing justice: The choice of punishments. New York: Hill and Wang, 1976. Reprint: Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1986.
von Hirsch, A., Knapp, K. A., and Tonry, M. The sentencing commission and its guidelines. Boston: Northeastern University Press, 1987.
Washington sentencing guidelines. In Revised code of Washington, secs. 9.94A.340 through 9.94A.420.
Washington Sentencing Guidelines Commission. Report to the legislature: January 1, 1987. Olympia: Washington Sentencing Commission, 1987.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1989 Plenum Press, New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Knapp, K.A. (1989). Criminal Sentencing Reform. In: Goodstein, L., MacKenzie, D.L. (eds) The American Prison. Law, Society and Policy, vol 4. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5652-3_7
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-5652-3_7
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4684-5654-7
Online ISBN: 978-1-4684-5652-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive