PREVIOUS STUDIES OF SENTENCING ARE BRIEFLY REVIEWED. THIS IS FOLLOWED BY AN OUTLINE OF THE PROCEDURES USED IN THE PRESENT STUDY. IN THIS STUDY, SENTENCES AND 48 VARIABLES BELIEVED TO AFFECT SENTENCING WERE RECORDED FROM JUDGES' FILES OF 432 GRAND LARCENY AND UNIFORM CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES ACT (UCSA) CASES DECIDED BY 19 OF 24 KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT JUDGES BETWEEN MARCH 1973 AND MAY 1974. THE STUDY FOCUSES ON THE INFLUENCE THAT THESE VARIOUS FACTORS HAD UPON THE JUDGE'S SENTENCING DECISION. THUS, THE METHODOLOGY EMPLOYED IN EVALUATING THE DATA COLLECTED WAS AIMED AT IDENTIFYING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DEFENDANT POPULATION AND SENTENCE DISPOSITIONS. THE FINDINGS INDICATED THAT NO SINGLE SET OF STANDARDS FOR SENTENCING IS FOLLOWED BY THE JUDGES THAT PARTICIPATED IN THE STUDY. RATHER, FOUR SENTENCING PATTERNS EMERGED. HOWEVER, CONTRARY TO THE FINDINGS OF SOME PRIOR STUDIES, THE RESULTS OF THE STUDY INDICATED THAT JUDGES DO SENTENCE ACCORDING TO STANDARDS, ALTHOUGH DIFFERENT JUDGES EMPLOY DIFFERENT STANDARDS. THE AUTHORS CONCLUDE THAT DISPARITY IN SENTENCING SEEMS TO BE THE RESULT OF DIFFERENCES IN JUDICIAL PHILOSOPHY RATHER THAT OF ARBITRARY DECISIONMAKING. (AUTHOR ABSTRACT MODIFIED)