AFTER AN INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT BY THE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN, A PROFESSOR OF LAW FROM HARVARD UNIVERSITY COMMENTED ON DISPARITIES IN THE CURRENT SENTENCING SYSTEM, CRITICIZED FLAT-TIME SENTENCING, AND ESPOUSED PRESUMPTIVE SENTENCING AS WELL AS SENTENCING COMMISSION TO DEVELOP GUIDELINES. A U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE CONCURRED WITH THE FIRST WITNESS AND ELABORATED ON THE CONCEPT OF A SENTENCING COMMISSION, WHILE A PRIVATE ATTORNEY WITH EXPERIENCE IN NEW YORK CITY GOVERNMENT ENDORSED PRESUMPTIVE SENTENCING, BUT EXPRESSED CONCERN OVER ITS EFFECTS ON OVERCROWDED PRISONS AND OTHER SUCH FACILITIES. THE COMMITTEE THEN HEARD DISSENTING COMMENTS FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN JUSTICE INSTITUTE. THE DEAN OF THE CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL BEGAN THE SECOND DAY OF HEARINGS BY CATEGORIZING TRENDS IN SENTENCING REFORM AS THOSE WHICH RELY ON THE LEGISLATURE TO DEFINE CATEGORIES OF CRIME AND AGGRAVATING AND MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES AND THOSE WHICH DELEGATE THESE RESPONSIBILITIES TO SENTENCING COMMISSIONS. THE HEAD OF AN AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE ON CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES AND SERVICES FAVORED DETERMINATE SENTENCING, DIRECTING HIS REMARKS TO THE DIVISION OF SENTENCING RESPONSIBILITY BETWEEN THE LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL BRANCHES, JAIL STANDARDS, AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESEARCH. REMAINING WITNESSES WERE FROM ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS AND COMMENTED ON STATE DETERMINATE SENTENCING SYSTEMS, SENTENCING COMMISSION VERSUS LEGISLATIVELY MANDATED SENTENCING FORMULAS, AND RESPONSIBILITIES OF A SENTENCING COMMISSION. A SUMMARY OF A 1978 REPORT BY A PANEL OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES CONCERNING RESEARCH INTO THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN CRIME, DETERRENCE, AND INCAPACITATION IS INCLUDED. AN ADDITIONAL STATEMENT FROM THE AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION IS APPENDED WHICH OPPOSES SEVERAL SENTENCING PROVISIONS OF THE LEGISLATION.