DETERMINATE V INDETERMINATE SENTENCING - SOME MYTHS IN THE CONTROVERSY (FROM ISSUES IN POLICE AND CRIMINAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1978, BY WILLIAM TAYLOR AND MICHAEL BRASWELL - SEE NCJ-59796)

• NCJ Number: 59798
• Author(s): T R CLEAR; R G CULBERTSON
• Date Published: 1978
• Length: 25 pages
• Corporate Author: University Press of America
• Publication Format: Document
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

INDETERMINATE SENTENCING HAS FALLEN INTO DISFAVOR BECAUSE IT IS IDENTIFIED WITH THE TREATMENT MODEL OF CORRECTIONS. DETERMINATE SENTENCING WILL NOT ELIMINATE DISCRETION, IT WILL MERELY SHIFT IT TO THE PROSECUTOR.

Abstract

THE DEBATE OVER DETERMINATE VERSUS INDETERMINATE SENTENCING IS ACTUALLY A DEBATE BETWEEN PROPONENTS OF THE MEDICAL OR TREATMENT MODEL OF CORRECTIONS (WHICH HAS NOT PROVED EFFECTIVE) AND THOSE WHO FAVOR THE PUNITIVE MODEL (WHICH MAY LEAD TO TYRANNY). THE MAJOR AGRUMENTS PUT FORTH IN FAVOR OF DETERMINATE SENTENCING ARE (1) IT WILL ELIMINATE UNJUSTIFIED SENTENCING DISPARITY AND (2) IT WILL ELIMINATE UNDULY HARSH OR UNDULY LENIENT SENTENCING. BOTH OF THESE ARGUMENTS ASSUME THAT THE JUDGE OR THE JURY DETERMINES AN OFFENDERS SENTENCE. HOWEVER, THE DETERMINATION IS OFTEN MADE FARTHER DOWN THE LINE, WHEN POLICE DECIDE TO CHARGE OR NOT TO CHARGE THE OFFENDER, OR WHEN THE PROSECUTOR ENTERS INTO PLEA NEGOTIATIONS. MANDATORY SENTENCING ONLY SHIFTS MORE DECISIONS OUT OF THE COURTS AND DOWN TO THE PROSECUTORIAL LEVEL. THE MAJOR AREAS OF CONCERN IN THE DETERMINATE VERSUS INDETERMINATE DEBATE ARE THE EFFECTIVENESS, THE HUMANENESS, AND THE JUSTICE OF THE SENTENCING PROCESS. THE PRO AND CON ARGUMENTS FOR EACH SIDE ARE SUMMARIZED. THE BEST ANSWER SEEMS TO BE A SENTENCING RANGE WITH DISCRETION OF PAROLE BOARDS LIMITED BY CLEARLY DEFINED GUIDELINES. A TABLE SUMMARIZES THE DETERMINATE AND PARTIALLY INDETERMINATE ARGUMENTS. NOTES AND REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED.