skip navigation


Register for Latest Research

Stay Informed
Register with NCJRS to receive NCJRS's biweekly e-newsletter JUSTINFO and additional periodic emails from NCJRS and the NCJRS federal sponsors that highlight the latest research published or sponsored by the Office of Justice Programs.

NCJRS Abstract

The document referenced below is part of the NCJRS Virtual Library collection. To conduct further searches of the collection, visit the Virtual Library. See the Obtain Documents page for direction on how to access resources online, via mail, through interlibrary loans, or in a local library.


NCJ Number: 153853 Add to Shopping cart Find in a Library
Title: National Assessment of Structured Sentencing
Series: BJA Monographs
Corporate Author: National Council on Crime and Delinquency
United States of America
Date Published: 1996
Page Count: 152
Sponsoring Agency: Bureau of Justice Assistance
Washington, DC 20531
National Council on Crime and Delinquency
Washington, DC 20005
National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Rockville, MD 20849
Grant Number: 92-SA-CX-0003
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/NCJRS
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America
Document: PDF|Text
Type: Survey
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: The last two decades of sentencing reforms designed to replace indeterminate sentencing with structured sentencing schemes such as determinate sentencing, mandatory minimum penalties, and sentencing guidelines were evaluated with respect to their impacts and the effectiveness of the approaches used.
Abstract: The analysis revealed that 16 States and the Federal Government have implemented or are about to implement presumptive or voluntary/advisory sentencing guidelines. Another five States have adopted determinate sentencing systems. All States use some version of mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Most States continue to allow inmates to earn good-time credits either to reduce a sentence or to advance a parole eligibility date. Most States have retained some form of discretionary release and postrelease supervision. Most States do not use sentencing guidelines. The structure of sentencing guidelines varies dramatically for both assessing sentencing disposition criteria and determining sentence length. Implementation of sentencing guidelines often requires 2 years. Although guidelines have helped reduce sentencing guidelines, disparity reductions have eroded somewhat over time. Findings indicated that structured sentencing reforms have not had any appreciable effect on the problem of prison crowding. As State prisons remain crowded, they will continue to use discretionary early release programs. Findings indicated that sentencing guidelines developed by sentencing commissions are the best method of achieving the goals of reducing sentencing disparity, incarceration rates, and prison crowding. States should consider nine approaches in developing structured sentencing policies. The Federal Government can assist States in this effort in several ways. Tables, figures, map, and footnotes
Main Term(s): Court reform
Index Term(s): BJA Grant-related Documents; Criminology; Determinate Sentencing; Indeterminate sentences; Mandatory Sentencing; Sentencing commissions; Sentencing disparity; Sentencing guidelines; Sentencing reform
Note: BJA Monograph
To cite this abstract, use the following link:

*A link to the full-text document is provided whenever possible. For documents not available online, a link to the publisher's website is provided. Tell us how you use the NCJRS Library and Abstracts Database - send us your feedback.