skip navigation

CrimeSolutions.gov

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar

PUBLICATIONS

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Library collection.
To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the NCJRS Abstracts Database.

How to Obtain Documents
 
NCJ Number: NCJ 175721     Find in a Library
Title: Fragmentation of Sentencing and Corrections in America, Research in Brief
Series: NIJ Research in Brief
Author(s): Michael Tonry
Date Published: 09/1999
Page Count: 8
Sponsoring Agency: University of Minnesota
United States of America

National Institute of Justice
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America
Contract Number: 97-MU-MU-K006;
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: Text PDF 
Type: Legislation/Policy Analysis
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: This paper, the first in a series from the Executive Sessions on Sentencing and Corrections, presents an overview of the current state of sentencing and corrections in America and a framework for analyzing the factors most likely to shape 21st century developments.
Abstract: After a quarter-century of changes, there is no longer anything that can be called "the American system" of sentencing and corrections. As recently as 1975 there was a distinctively American approach, usually referred to as indeterminate sentencing, and it had changed little in the preceding 50 years. Its core features were broad authorized sentencing ranges, parole release, and case-by-case decision making. Its premises were that rehabilitation of offenders is a primary goal, that decisions affecting individuals should be tailored to them, and that judges and corrections officials have special expertise for making those decisions. All these features and premises have been under attack. In the most radical and comprehensive departures, some States and the Federal Government abolished parole boards, and some jurisdictions established comprehensive, detailed guidelines for sentencing. In addition, jurisdictions adopted mandatory minimum sentences, three-strikes laws, and truth-in-sentencing laws that require some offenders to serve at least 85 percent of imposed prison sentences. There are now many approaches to sentencing and corrections in the United States. Some States have guidelines with parole release. Some three-strikes States have adopted truth-in-sentencing; some have not. At the same time, restorative and community justice initiatives have taken root and begun to spread. They start with premises different from those of the sentencing law changes. One is a difference in perspective on the importance of individualized, case-by-case responses to crimes. Most restorative and community justice programs delegate to the victim, the offender, and others the decision about how best to respond to the particular factors of each case. It remains to be seen how sentencing laws and practices will evolve in the coming years, and whether one or a few approaches will gradually displace others. 9 notes
Main Term(s): Court procedures
Index Term(s): Sentencing/Sanctions ; Sentencing guidelines ; Sentencing reform ; Sentencing factors ; Sentencing trends
Note: From Sentencing and Corrections Issues for the 21st Century, Papers From the Executive Sessions on Sentencing and Corrections, No. 1 Research in Brief
   
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=175721

* A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's web site is provided.