skip navigation

CrimeSolutions.gov

Add your conference to our Justice Events calendar

PUBLICATIONS

Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

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. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.

 
  NCJ Number: NCJ 186480     Find in a Library
  Title: Sentencing Guidelines: Reflections on the Future, Research in Brief
  Document URL: Text PDF 
  Author(s): Robin L. Lubitz ; Thomas W. Ross
  Date Published: 06/2001
  Page Count: 7
  Series: NIJ Research in Brief
  Annotation: This paper discussed the future of the sentencing guidelines movement and its adaptability to inevitable changes in criminal justice policy.
  Abstract: America‚Äôs experiment with sentencing guidelines has survived more than a quarter century. They began locally and expanded to State and Federal levels. The ideological neutrality of guidelines constituted their strength and staying power. Yet, their success or failure was judged by the goals a jurisdiction had set for its guidelines, which varied considerably. This paper examined the question of whether the sentencing guidelines movement would grow stronger or weaker as the 21st Century began and changes in criminal justice policy inevitably occurred. Sentencing guidelines have been an effective means of establishing sentencing policies and reflect many varied sentencing philosophies. The guideline systems are defined and based on a set of core principles: proportionality, consistency/uniformity, and rationality/transparency in sentencing. These principles seem to be at odds with new concepts of sentencing and corrections, specifically restorative justice. Restorative justice promotes reparation over retribution. The paper discussed the potential incompatibility of restorative justice and sentencing guidelines as either a perception or as a reality. On a philosophical core, restorative justice appears incompatible with guidelines, but when it comes to practical application there is the ability to incorporate elements of restorative justice into sentencing guidelines. Summarizing the future of sentencing guidelines, the most compelling reasons to expect that they will continue to be widely accepted and applied are their adaptability and ideological neutrality. It is of critical importance that the internal integrity of the sentencing guidelines remain intact.
  Main Term(s): Sentencing guidelines
  Index Term(s): Sentencing/Sanctions ; Victim-offender reconciliation
  Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice (NIJ)
US Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
United States of America

US Dept of Justice, Office of Justice Programs
Corrections Program Office
United States of America
  Grant Number: 97-MUMU-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
  Type: Report (Study/Research)
  Country: United States of America
  Language: English
  Note: NIJ Sentencing and Corrections, Issues for the 21st Century, No. 10
   
  To cite this abstract, use the following link:
https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=186480

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.