THE MECHANICS OF SENTENCING IN WASHINGTON ARE DESCRIBED IN SECTIONS ON DIVERSIONARY PROGRAMS, DEFERRED PROSECUTION, SENTENCING ALTERNATIVES, AND PAROLE. RESEARCH SUGGESTING THAT REHABILITATIVE ASSUMPTIONS UNDERLYING INDETERMINATE SENTENCING STRUCTURES ARE FAULTY IS CITED. ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST THE GENERAL AND INDIVIDUAL DETERRENT EFFECTS OF PUNISHMENT ARE NOTED. THE EQUITY OF THE DISCRETIONARY SYSTEM OF SENTENCING IS BROUGHT INTO QUESTION, WITH REFERENCES TO DISPARITY IN SENTENCING BY THE COURTS, DISPARITY IN SETTING RELEASE DATES BY PAROLE BOARDS, PAROLE BOARD USE OF BASE EXPECTANCY TABLES AND A SCALE OF OFFENSE SEVERITY IN DETERMINING RELEASE DATES, AND INTERFERENCE WITH THE HUMAN VALUES OF LIBERTY AND VOLITION. SENTENCING REFORM TRENDS ARE OUTLINED, AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REFORMS IN WASHINGTON ARE SET FORTH. THE RECOMMENDED SENTENCING STRUCTURE PROVIDES FOR A DETERMINATE SENTENCE FOR EACH CATEGORY IN THE STATE'S CRIMINAL CODE. EXTENDED TERMS FOR REPEAT AND DANGEROUS OFFENDERS ARE PROVIDED FOR. COURTS MAY SET SENTENCES WITHIN A RELATIVELY NARROW RANGE SUBJECT TO THE PRESENCE OF MITIGATING OR AGGRAVATING FACTORS. POLICIES WITH REGARD TO SUSPENDED AND DEFERRED SENTENCES FOR FIRST FELONY CONVICTIONS ARE PERMISSIVE. FISCAL AND HUMANITARIAN ARGUMENTS FOR THE PROPOSED REFORMS ARE PRESENTED. SUPPORTING MATERIALS, INCLUDING DETAILS OF THE PROPOSED SENTENCING STRUCTURE, ARE INCLUDED.