Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Sentencing Policy
View through CrossRef
Sentencing policies govern the administration of legal sanctions for individuals convicted of a criminal offense. As such, these policies shape a vast array of institutional processes ranging from the likelihood, nature, and duration of imprisonment, to release decisions and the conditions of post-incarceration supervision. Starting in the mid 1970s the US approach to sentencing moved away from a relatively uniform set of indeterminate state systems focused on individualized, case-specific decisions to a more fragmented set of determinate systems emphasizing structured decision making and reduced discretion for legal actors. This change also implies a greater emphasis on retributive ideologies in contrast to more traditional rehabilitation-centered approaches. This framework has been progressively developed through a number of state and federal sentencing policies—including, for example, repeat-offender statuses, sentencing enhancements and mandatory minimums, truth-in-sentencing statuses, and drug laws. In most cases these initiatives have been implemented through legislative action, although in recent years other government entities (such as sentencing commissions) have had more influence in the development of these policies. A rich tradition of socio-legal studies has explored the linkages between sentencing and the role, justification, and functions of legal punishments in society. Research has also highlighted a number of social covariates of sentencing policies—such as more conservative political ideologies and more intense partisan politics, as well as greater levels of economic resources—that have been linked to more punitive approaches and higher incarceration rates. Studies have also explored case- and jurisdiction-level disparities in sentencing outcomes and processes related to attributes of defendants (notably race and gender). An emerging body of works has begun to document the specific impact of sentencing policies on offenders and on the criminal justice system as a whole. These works are particularly relevant to understanding the context and impact of mass incarceration for prisoners, communities, and government agencies.
Title: Sentencing Policy
Description:
Sentencing policies govern the administration of legal sanctions for individuals convicted of a criminal offense.
As such, these policies shape a vast array of institutional processes ranging from the likelihood, nature, and duration of imprisonment, to release decisions and the conditions of post-incarceration supervision.
Starting in the mid 1970s the US approach to sentencing moved away from a relatively uniform set of indeterminate state systems focused on individualized, case-specific decisions to a more fragmented set of determinate systems emphasizing structured decision making and reduced discretion for legal actors.
This change also implies a greater emphasis on retributive ideologies in contrast to more traditional rehabilitation-centered approaches.
This framework has been progressively developed through a number of state and federal sentencing policies—including, for example, repeat-offender statuses, sentencing enhancements and mandatory minimums, truth-in-sentencing statuses, and drug laws.
In most cases these initiatives have been implemented through legislative action, although in recent years other government entities (such as sentencing commissions) have had more influence in the development of these policies.
A rich tradition of socio-legal studies has explored the linkages between sentencing and the role, justification, and functions of legal punishments in society.
Research has also highlighted a number of social covariates of sentencing policies—such as more conservative political ideologies and more intense partisan politics, as well as greater levels of economic resources—that have been linked to more punitive approaches and higher incarceration rates.
Studies have also explored case- and jurisdiction-level disparities in sentencing outcomes and processes related to attributes of defendants (notably race and gender).
An emerging body of works has begun to document the specific impact of sentencing policies on offenders and on the criminal justice system as a whole.
These works are particularly relevant to understanding the context and impact of mass incarceration for prisoners, communities, and government agencies.
Related Results
A Suggestion for Making the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and the U.S. Sentencing Commission Reflect the Realities of Post-Booker Sentencing
A Suggestion for Making the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and the U.S. Sentencing Commission Reflect the Realities of Post-Booker Sentencing
Abstract
It has been approximately seventeen years since the Supreme Court issued its landmark decision in United States v. Booker. In Booker, the Court transformed ...
What's Happening with Child Pornography Sentencing?
What's Happening with Child Pornography Sentencing?
Abstract
Guest editor Jelani Jefferson Exum introduces this issue of Federal Sentencing Reporter, which focuses on federal child pornography sentencing. Acknowledgin...
Sentencing Enhancements
Sentencing Enhancements
Sentencing enhancements are policies that mandate that people who are convicted of criminalized behaviors while engaging in generally non-criminalized behaviors—such as being in a ...
Evidence-Based Sentencing
Evidence-Based Sentencing
The evidence-based practice (EBP) movement can be traced to a 1992 article in the Journal of the American Medical Association, although decision-making with empirical evidence (rat...
Sentencing in Chaos
Sentencing in Chaos
Abstract
Antonin Scalia famously observed in his dissent in United States v. Booker that an advisory sentencing guidelines regime would result in a “discordant symph...
Sentencing “Boat Defendants”: Breaking the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s Monopoly on Gathering Data on Federal Sentencing Practices, and Why It Matters
Sentencing “Boat Defendants”: Breaking the U.S. Sentencing Commission’s Monopoly on Gathering Data on Federal Sentencing Practices, and Why It Matters
Abstract
It is critically important for independent researchers, unaffiliated with sentencing commissions, to conduct vibrant sentencing data collection and rigorous...
Truth-In-Sentencing
Truth-In-Sentencing
Truth-in-sentencing (TIS) describes a range of justice system policies that eliminate discretionary parole release and significantly reduce good-time accrual rates in an attempt to...
21. Sentencing Procedure and the General Principles of Sentencing
21. Sentencing Procedure and the General Principles of Sentencing
This chapter explains the procedure on passing sentence and the general principles that govern a court’s decision when passing sentence. It discusses the role of the Crow Prosecuti...


