IT IS NOTED THAT 'SENTENCES OF IMPRISONMENT' IS THE FIRST MAJOR REVIEW OF THE STRUCTURE OF MAXIMUM SENTENCES IN ENGLAND IN OVER A CENTURY. IT IS PRAISED FOR ITS THOROUGHNESS AND SCHOLARSHIP IN TRACING THE HISTORY OF SENTENCING AND ITS INTERRELATIONSHIP WITH THE PRISON SYSTEM. A BASIC PROPOSAL PROVIDES THAT INSTEAD OF REVALUING MAXIMUM SENTENCES, CONSIDERED TOO DIFFICULT AND CONTROVERSIAL TO UNDERTAKE, IT SHOULD BE RECOGNIZED THAT 90 PERCENT OF THE SENTENCES DISPENSED FOR EACH PARTICULAR OFFENSE WOULD BE CONSIDERED THE MAXIMUM SENTENCE; HOWEVER, IN THE CASES OF EXCEPTIONALLY DANGEROUS OFFENDERS, JUDGES WOULD HAVE THE OPTION TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM SENTENCE IN THE INTEREST OF PUBLIC PROTECTION. THE PRESENT SYSTEM STIPULATES MAXIMUM SENTENCES DEEMED SO EXCESSIVE BY MOST CONTEMPORARY JUDGES THAT THEY ARE SELDOM USED. THE MAIN ARGUMENT FAVORING THE RECOMMENDED SCHEME IS INDICATED TO BE THE OFFERING OF A BETTER CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK WITHIN WHICH THE REDUCTION OF THE LENGTH OF PRISON SENTENCES COULD OCCUR. THE AUTHOR ARGUES THAT SINCE THE RECOMMENDED SCHEME SUGGESTS A LEGITIMIZATION OF SENTENCE PRACTICES PRESENTLY OPERATIVE, NO ACTUAL REFORM OCCURS. INSTEAD, THE REAL NEED IS TO PROVIDE FOR MORE SUITABLE AND EFFECTIVE ALTERNATIVES TO IMPRISONMENT FOR MANY KINDS OF PETTY RECIDIVIST OFFENDERS. ALSO, SENTENCING GUIDELINES, BASED ON REASONABLE OFFENSE AND OFFENDER CHARACTERISTICS AND TAKING INTO ACCOUNT CURRENT SENTENCING AND RELEASE PRACTICES AND CORRECTIONAL RESOURCES IS SUGGESTED AS A MORE ADVANCED APPROACH TO SENTENCING. THE DISCRETION ALLOWED JUDGES IN EXCEEDING THE MAXIMUM SENTENCE DETERMINED BY THE 90 PERCENT STANDARD IS CONSIDERED UNWISE, PARTICULARLY IN THE LIGHT OF THE LACK OF ANY GENERALLY ACCEPTED MEASURES OR PREDICTORS OF DANGEROUSNESS. THE REPORT OF THE COUNCIL ON SENTENCING FOR MURDER AND MANSLAUGHTER AND ON THE MATTERS OF THE SUSPENDED SENTENCE, COMBINED SENTENCES, AND CRIMINAL BANKRUPTCY ARE BRIEFLY MENTIONED. (JCB)