Search engine for discovering works of Art, research articles, and books related to Art and Culture
ShareThis
Javascript must be enabled to continue!

A History of American Sentencing

View through CrossRef
Abstract American sentencing has ebbed and flowed over two centuries—with different institutions playing different roles, different theories of punishment, different substantive laws, and different sovereigns (federal or state) playing key roles. Sometimes the changes were triggered by objective conditions, like the crime rate but, more often in recent years, by political pressures (“tough on crime”) and the media. This chapter describes four periods in the evolution of American sentencing law, from colonial juries, to the period of indeterminate sentencing, then mandatory guidelines and mandatory minimum sentencing, and the current—not so easy to categorize—system. We swung from reposing expertise in judges—when rehabilitation was the dominant purpose of sentencing—to the opposite—ceding sentencing to Congress and a Sentencing Commission, and elevating retribution above all. In recent years, with a raging debate about mass incarceration, the disproportionate imprisonment of minorities, the cost of imprisonment, as well as a declining crime rate, the pendulum has swung back—to a degree—to judges, enabling the return of some discretion and programs focused on rehabilitation. But the history of American sentencing suggests that even those trends are unstable; habits of mass incarceration and retribution die hard.
Oxford University PressNew York, NY
Title: A History of American Sentencing
Description:
Abstract American sentencing has ebbed and flowed over two centuries—with different institutions playing different roles, different theories of punishment, different substantive laws, and different sovereigns (federal or state) playing key roles.
Sometimes the changes were triggered by objective conditions, like the crime rate but, more often in recent years, by political pressures (“tough on crime”) and the media.
This chapter describes four periods in the evolution of American sentencing law, from colonial juries, to the period of indeterminate sentencing, then mandatory guidelines and mandatory minimum sentencing, and the current—not so easy to categorize—system.
We swung from reposing expertise in judges—when rehabilitation was the dominant purpose of sentencing—to the opposite—ceding sentencing to Congress and a Sentencing Commission, and elevating retribution above all.
In recent years, with a raging debate about mass incarceration, the disproportionate imprisonment of minorities, the cost of imprisonment, as well as a declining crime rate, the pendulum has swung back—to a degree—to judges, enabling the return of some discretion and programs focused on rehabilitation.
But the history of American sentencing suggests that even those trends are unstable; habits of mass incarceration and retribution die hard.

Related Results

Sentencing consistency in the New Zealand District Courts
Sentencing consistency in the New Zealand District Courts
<p>This thesis examines the consistency of sentencing between the circuits of the New Zealand District Courts. Four predictions based on a sequence or chain of theories incor...
Assessing Proposals for Mandatory Procedural Protections for Sentencings under the Guidelines
Assessing Proposals for Mandatory Procedural Protections for Sentencings under the Guidelines
12 Federal Sentencing Reporter 212 (2000)The federal sentencing guidelines have received sustained criticism from scholars, judges, and practitioners. Critics claim that the guidel...
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...
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 ...
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...

Back to Top