NCJ Number
102024
Journal
Criminal Justice Quarterly Volume: 9 Issue: 2 Dated: (Spring 1986) Pages: 103-147
Date Published
1986
Length
45 pages
Annotation
This article examines deficiencies in the determinate sentencing guidelines established by the New Jersey Code of Criminal Justice, critiques the State supreme court's attempt to remedy these problems in State v. Yarborough, and proposes legislative amendments that would structure decisions in consecutive sentencing cases.
Abstract
While the Code seeks to reduce sentencing disparity and ensure proportionality of sentences in the single-offense context, decisions involving multiple sentences remain largely within the unbridled discretion of the court. In Yarborough, the Court attempted to establish consecutive sentencing guidelines. However, it was only partially successful because it lacked a strong conceptual basis upon which to build, was limited by previous decisions extolling the primacy of the retributive punishment rationale, and failed to take into account the complex sentencing issues involved. It is recommended that the fixed ceiling on the aggregate term of consecutive sentences established in Yarborough be replaced by a selective ceiling, the application of which is restricted to those circumstances where it is justified by the rationales that support imposition of consecutive sentences. It is further recommended that the court shall state its reasons for imposing consecutive, rather than concurrent sentences; and that, in determining the appropriate sentence, the court consider specified aggravating and mitigating circumstances. 283 footnotes.