CJ 100 Lecture Notes - Lecture 60: United States Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Prison Overcrowding
Sentencing Statutes and Guidelines
There are three sentencing systems: those featuring determinate‐sentencing statutes; those using
indeterminate‐sentencing statutes; and those applying sentencing guidelines. Some overlap exists
among the categories. For example, a mandatory sentence is considered a type of determinate
sentence. Mandatory sentencing may be used in jurisdictions that also use indeterminate
sentencing as well as in those that use sentencing guidelines.
Drafters of any sentencing law must grapple with the problem of sentencing
disparities, inconsistencies in sentencing offenders in which those committing the
same crime receive different sentences. Sentencing disparities are usually based on
race, gender, region, or socioeconomic status. Within academic circles, a debate rages
over the effects of race on sentencing. A recent review of 38 studies published since
1975 reports that many of the studies concluded that race had a direct effect on the in‐
out decision (in other words, the decision concerning whether the offender should be
punished in a penal institution or out in the community) and that this effect remained
even after the inclusion of controls for prior record and crime seriousness.
Other researchers claim that race influences sentence severity indirectly through its
effect on factors such as bail status, type of attorney, or type of disposition.
Researchers have also found that the racial composition of the offender/victim pair may
be a better predictor of sentence severity than the race of the offender. For instance,
blacks who murder whites are more likely to be sentenced to death than blacks who
murder blacks or than whites who murder blacks or whites. Racial and other kinds of
sentencing disparities make a mockery of the principle of “equal justice under the law.”
Indeterminate sentences
Indeterminate sentencing is a system of sentencing in which a legislature establishes
maximum and minimum terms for each crime and a judge makes a discretionary
decision as to what the maximum and minimum sentences should be for each convicted
offender. For those whose sentence is prison, a parole board determines the amount of
time each inmate serves under correctional supervision.
The theory behind indeterminate sentencing statutes is rehabili tation—the sentence ‐ ‐
should meet the needs of the individual offender, and the offender should be locked up
until there is evidence that he or she has been “cured.” In states with indeterminate
sentencing, parole boards can release inmates once they have served the minimum
part of their sentences. Good time laws‐ further reduce the amount of time served.
Good time reduces a portion of an offender's sentence for good behavior while in
prison.
The impact of indeterminate sentencing
Benefits of sentence reduction programs, such as good time laws and early parole ‐ ‐
release, include promotion of discipline within prisons (because inmates are motivated
to engage in good behavior in order to earn or avoid losing good time) and the reduction
of prison overcrowding. Critics complain that most offenders are released from prison
before serving their full sentences and that indeterminate sentences produce gross
sentencing disparities because they allow judges too much discretion.
Determinate sentences
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
