How does access to this work benefit you? Let us know! Follow this and additional works at: http://academicworks.cuny.edu/jj_pubs Part of the Courts Commons, Criminal Law Commons, Criminal Procedure Commons, Criminology Commons, Judges Commons, Law and Politics Commons, Law and Society Commons, Law Enforcement and Corrections Commons, Legislation Commons, Politics and Social Change Commons, and the Race and Ethnicity Commons

/pdf/the-growth-of-incarceration-in-the-united-states-exploring-212x90j52g.pdf

The growth of incarceration in the United States: exploring causes and consequences

After a brief review of determinate sentencing systems, this study examines the impact of Minnesota's determinate sentencing law on various presentence and sentencing outcomes. Using comparable pre- and postguideline measures, the results of this study suggest that Minnesota's reform effort was largely successful in reducing disparity within the scope of the new guidelines. However, although the direct impact of socioeconomic attributes of the offender diminished, these characteristics continued to influence sentencing decisions indirectly through various presentence decisions and case attributes not governed by the guidelines Different models of charge bargaining and sentence negotiations are also observed when pre- and postguideline models are compared. Yet, the determinants of these time-specific models are not consistent with the assumptions of a circumvention argument. The paper concludes with suggestions for further research evaluating the impact of determinate sentencing systems on achieving social neutrality in the application of criminal sanctions.

Socioeconomic disparities under determinate sentencing systems: a comparison of preguideline and postguideline practices in minnesota*

We estimate the impact of determinate sentencing laws (DSLs) on prison commitments, prison populations, and Uniform Crime Report crime rates. Ten states enacted these laws between 1976 and 1984; all abolished parole and most established presumptive sentences. The research uses a multiple time-series design that, among other benefits, controls for national trends and facilitates the use of control variables. We found that DSLs are clearly associated with prison population growth in only one state, Indiana, and with major reductions in two, Minnesota and Washington. The remaining laws show no evidence of increasing populations and may have reduced them somewhat. The estimated impacts on commitments are similarly varied. There is little or no evidence that DSLs affect crime. Earlier studies evaluating individual DSLs are often criticized for poor research designs, and our findings support the criticisms.

Determinate sentencing and abolishing parole: the long‐term impacts on prisons and crime*

Regulated and Unregulated Sentencing Decisions: An Analysis of First-Year Practices under Minnesota's Felony Sentencing Guidelines

The reviving interest in noncustodial penalties makes it urgent to explore the ethical limits on their use. This article explores three kinds of limits: proportionality (desert) constraints, restrictions against humiliating or degrading punishments, and concerns about intrusion into the rights of third parties. In connection with the second of these limits, the concept of “acceptable penal content” is developed.

The Ethics of Community-Based Sanctions

Determinate sentencing has generated a great deal of interest over the past several years. The sentencing law and administrative rules in many states have been amended in ways intended to create determinate penalty systems. This article is based on the findings of a survey of these law and rule revisions. The article provides an overview of the various approaches to determinacy and a preliminary assessment of these systems.

Kathleen J. Hanrahan

Papers

Determinate Penalty Systems in America: an Overview

The question of parole: Retention, reform, or abolition?