NCJ Number
193237
Journal
Justice Research and Policy Volume: 3 Issue: 2 Dated: Fall 2001 Pages: 35-55
Date Published
2001
Length
21 pages
Annotation
This article discusses issues related to the enactment of the Sentencing Reform Amendment Act of 2000 in the District of Columbia.
Abstract
Historically in the District, judges had broad discretion in handing down a criminal sentence. Until August 2000, the District had an “indeterminate” sentencing system for all felony offenses. For prison sentences, the judge imposed a maximum sentence that did not exceed the maximum sentence fixed by law, and a minimum sentence that did not exceed one third of the maximum sentence imposed. The Department of Corrections (DOC) handled typical jail populations, including a large number of pretrial offenders. However, as a state-like system, it housed convicted felons, many serving long sentences. The latter were primarily housed at a prison complex in Lorton, Virginia. The Revitalization Act occurred because of severe failings in the Lorton complex. This set the stage for major changes to the District’s criminal justice system. The principal effect of these changes was to convert the District’s sentencing system for the most serious felonies from an indeterminate system of minimum and maximum prison terms, with parole, to a determinate system with a single prison term imposed, at least 85 percent of which the defendant would be required to serve. While the Revitalization Act closed Lorton, many questions and potential problems remained, and this became an occasion for a collaborative learning agenda, including the Court, the Council, criminal defense and prosecution, the Mayor and the rest of the executive branch, and the citizenry. Despite a promising beginning, a number of barriers remain to developing a continuous learning system. The most important one is the lack of commitment to and investment in ongoing data and research. 23 footnotes, 20 references