THE SEMINAR FOCUSED ON THREE PARTICIPANTS WHO HAD DEVELOPED, AS A RESULT OF INDEPENDENT STUDIES, A SERIES OF PROPOSALS FOR SENTENCING REFORM: NORVAL MORRIS HAD BEEN CONCERNED PRIMARILY WITH DEVELOPING CRITERIA FOR THE SELECTION OF INMATES FOR MAXIMUM-SECURITY PRISON, ANDREW VON HIRSCH HAD ADDRESSED THE PRINCIPLES UNDERLYING THE GENERAL USES OF INCARCERATION, AND LESLIE WILKINS HAD DEVELOPED--WHILE WORKING ON A PAROLE DECISIONMAKING PROJECT -- A SET OF PROPOSALS WHICH HAD DIRECT REFERENCE TO SENTENCING. THE DOMINANT GOALS OF SENTENCING -- DETERRENCE, INCAPACITATION, TREATMENT, AND DESERT -- ARE DISCUSSED. THE CHANGING EMPHASIS OF SENTENCING GOALS IS UNDERSCORED AND THE VALIDITY OF REHABILITATIVE AIMS IS EXAMINED IN DETAIL. IT IS NOTED THAT ANY CRIME-CONTROL PURPOSE HAS DIFFICULTIES WHEN IT COMES TO THE ACCURACY OF ITS MEASURES AND THAT THE CONTINUING DISILLUSIONMENT WITH THE EMPIRICALLY DEMONSTRATED OUTCOMES OF TREATMENT EFFECTS IS EQUALLY APPLICABLE TO DETERRENT AND INCAPACITATIVE PURPOSES. THE THREE ALTERNATIVE SYSTEMS ARE DISCUSSED INDIVIDUALLY. MORRIS' PROPOSAL DEALS WITH DESERT AS A LIMITING CONSTRAINT: THE SENTENCING JUDGE WOULD EXERCISE DISCRETION, BUT ONLY TO IMPOSE A LESSER PENALTY, NEVER A GREATER ONE. WILKINS PROPOSED MORE STRINGENT CONTROL OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION: AN OFFENDER WOULD RECEIVE A SENTENCE DERIVED ACCORDING TO HOW HIS PARTICULAR OFFENSE RANKED ON A SERIOUSNESS SCALE AND HOW HIS PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS WERE TRANSLATED INTO A RANK ON AN EMPIRICALLY DERIVED RISK SCALE. VON HIRSCH TAKES A STRONG POSITION THAT DESERT SHOULD BE THE CENTRAL ORGANIZING PRINCIPLE OF A SENTENCING SYSTEM: THE PUNISHMENT IMPOSED IN A GIVEN CASE WOULD BE COMMENSURATE WITH THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE OFFENSE AND WITH THE SERIOUSNESS OF THE OFFENDER'S PRIOR OFFENSES; THERE WOULD BE A PRECISE PRESUMPTIVE SENTENCE FOR EACH GRADATION OF SERIOUSNESS OF OFFENSE AND OF PRIOR RECORD; AND VARIATION FROM THIS PRESUMPTIVE OR DESERVED SENTENCE WOULD BE ALLOWED ONLY TO A LIMITED DEGREE FOR OTHER SENTENCING PURPOSES, SUCH AS DETERRENCE, TREATMENT OR INCAPACITATION. THE PROBLEM OF SETTING THE MAXIMUM TERMS IS DISCUSSED WITH ATTENTION TO CONSIDERATION OF DESERT, THE PRINCIPLE OF PROPORTIONALITY, THE PREDICTION OF CRIMINALITY, AND ASPECTS OF PRIOR CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. THE NEED FOR FIXING PRECISE PENALTIES IS STRESSED; MITIGATING AND AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES AND THE ISSUE OF MANDATORY SENTENCING ARE DISCUSSED. NOTES ARE PROVIDED.