The move toward sentencing determinacy in the two States is reviewed. California's Uniform Determinate Sentencing Act of 1976 was partially motivated by the desire to quell the turmoil in the prisons; Oregon's bill, passed in October 1977, had the goals of achieving greater justice in sentencing and of structuring the discretion of the parole board. Changes in inmate disciplinary procedures are reviewed; both States used the same types of sanctions to control prisoners: sanctions that affected the quality and quantity of time prisoners were to serve. Measures affecting the quality of the inmate's term included removing his privileges and confining him to his quarters; measures affecting the quantity of his term included denying parole and setting an unusually distant parole release date. The effects of determinacy on prisoner misconduct are analyzed, and results of interviews conducted with prison administrators in California and Oregon in 1978 and 1979 are provided. The data suggest that prisoner misconduct was not directly associated with the transition from an indeterminate to a determinate sentencing system. However, correctional administrators in both States suggested that determinate sentencing may contribute to overcrowding, which in turn contributes to inmate misconduct. The need for research on other factors, including racial tensions and gang activities, is cited. Five tables and 13 references are included.