skip navigation

PUBLICATIONS

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: 90381 Find in a Library
Title: Criminal Justice Decisionmaking - Discretion vs Equity
Journal: Federal Probation  Volume:46  Issue:2  Dated:(June 1983)  Pages:36-41
Author(s): J D Stanfiel
Date Published: 1983
Page Count: 6
Sponsoring Agency: National Institute of Justice/
Rockville, MD 20849
NCJRS Photocopy Services
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
Sale Source: National Institute of Justice/
NCJRS paper reproduction
Box 6000, Dept F
Rockville, MD 20849
United States of America

NCJRS Photocopy Services
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
United States of America
Document: PDF
Publisher: https://www.uscourts.gov 
Language: English
Country: United States of America
Annotation: A rational and coherent sentencing policy should involve judicial guidelines that provide a definite target sentence based upon the just deserts philosophy and derived specifically from objective determinations of current offense severity and cumulative criminal history.
Abstract: The judge should be allowed some discretion in departing from the target sentence, but only with cogent written justification and only according to established criteria for such departures. The statutory minimum would be the base penalty for all offenders convicted of a given offense with the possibility of enhancements (a higher penalty level). This approach may well increase penalties for repeat offenders who have posed the greatest or most persistent dangers to society. It might also reduce penalties for first offenders and others whose criminal histories are not extensive. The system will only be effective if it works in a very selective way to identify offenders for more severe sanctions according to their history of harm to the community. This prescriptive sentencing model will remove inequities in sentencing that cannot be justified by severity of the crime, defendant's prior criminal history, or character considerations. References within the text and three footnotes are supplied.
Index Term(s): Determinate Sentencing; Judicial discretion; Sentencing disparity; Sentencing guidelines; Sentencing reform
To cite this abstract, use the following link:
http://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/abstract.aspx?ID=90381

*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.