SENTENCING DECISIONS IN NEW YORK ARE CHARACTERIZED BY INCONSISTENCIES, PARTLY DUE TO LAW ALLOWING JUDGES VAST DISCRETION IN SETTING SENTENCE LENGTHS AND PERMITTING THE PAROLE BOARD TO DETERMINE THE AMOUNT OF TIME A CRIMINAL ACTUALLY STAYS IN PRISON. FURTHERMORE, ALTHOUGH SENTENCING LAW REFORM MAY NOT REDUCE CRIME DIRECTLY, CERTAINTY OF PUNISHMENT METED OUT UNDER A STANDARD SET OF RULES CAN DETER CRIME. FOR THESE REASONS, A SYSTEM OF SENTENCING GUIDELINES IS PROPOSED, TO BE DRAWN UP BY AN INDEPENDENT COMMISSION USING A FORMULA WHICH TAKES INTO ACCOUNT THE CRIME AND THE OFFENDER'S HISTORY. THE LEGISLATURE WOULD RETAIN ITS RIGHT TO SET MAXIMUM TERMS, AND JUDGES COULD EXERCISE DISCRETION AND DEPART FROM THE GUIDELINES IF THE DECISION IS JUSTIFIABLE AND IS SUBJECT TO APPELLATE REVIEW. THE FOLLOWING FEATURES OF THE PROPOSED SYSTEM ARE DISCUSSED: COMPOSITION OF THE SENTENCING COMMISSION, FACTORS AFFECTING THE LENGTH AND TYPE OF SENTENCE, JUDICIAL USE OF GUIDELINES, APPELLATE REVIEW, ROLE OF THE PAROLE BOARD, SENTENCE REDUCTION, AND REHABILITATION. IN ORDER TO DEAL MORE EFFECTIVELY WITH CRIME, A VARIETY OF INTERMEDIATE ALTERNATIVES TO INCARCERATION SHOULD BE DEVELOPED, SUCH AS RESTITUTION, DAY FINES, AND COMMUNITY SERVICE ORDERS. PLEA BARGAINING SHOULD BE ASSESSED, AND MEASURES SHOULD BE INSTITUTED TO INSURE THAT INDICTMENTS CONTAIN REALISTIC CHARGES. ADDITIONAL MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION SERVICES SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO SETTLE SOME TYPES OF CASES OUT OF COURT. (MJM)