NCJ Number
81190
Journal
Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume: 72 Issue: 4 Dated: (Winter 1981) Pages: 1550-1596
Date Published
1981
Length
47 pages
Annotation
This article explores some of the major perplexities of the Model Sentencing and Corrections Act, which provides for the creation of a sentencing commission to promulgate sentencing guidelines.
Abstract
The article introduces the act's major sentencing proposals and suggests their deficiencies by chronicling the progress of an armed robbery suspect through the criminal justice system before and after implementation of the act. The proposed system of real offense sentencing is described. The author argues that the model act ignores certain precepts of law -- guilty pleas, trial verdicts, the law of evidence, the criminal burden of proof, and the substantive criminal law. Sentencing is based instead on the court's conclusions about what 'really happened' without regard to the offense charged. The article discusses the acts' failure to prescribe a retributive 'just deserts' sentencing system. Such a system aims to treat similar offenders in the same way, give high priority to the pursuit of equality in punishment, and proportion sanctions to defendants' moral culpability. Yet many provisions are incapacitative and deterrent and not consistent with a retributive approach. The author states that the act's provisions give no reasonable assurance of treating defendants fairly and consistently and suggests ways that sentencing reform might take the prosecutor into account. The author considers whether systematic real offense sentencing is more objectionable than the present system and concludes that the first model act should be replaced. Maintaining the same goals and structure as before, the second act should incorporate attempts to narrow sentencing choices, limit prison sentences to serious offenders, and constrain prosecutorial decisionmaking. Footnotes and tables are included.