Sentencing Resource Guide

Because sentencing is a critical component of the criminal justice process, it is continually changing to improve the justice system’s response to convicted criminals. Reforms often address broader goals of sentencing, such as the role of judges and the punishment options, but issues likewise include disparity in sentencing, judicial discretion, and the impact of sentencing policies on facilities and personnel resources. This topic includes information on sentencing commissions, sentencing guidelines, and sentencing reform.

Links to related online resources are listed below. Non-digitized publications may be borrowed from the NCSC Library; call numbers are provided.

Featured Links

``Evidenced-Based Sentencing to Improve Public Safety & Reduce Recidivism`` Model curriculum handbook intended to help trial judges develop sentencing practices that improve public safety and reduce the risk of offender recidivism. The Web-based curriculum is free of charge.

Center for Sentencing Initiatives Provides information, analysis, and education to promote sentencing practices that protect the public and reduce recidivism.

Court Technology Conference Presentations

Presentations from earlier National Court Technology Conferences.

Justice System Journal Articles

NACM Justice Achievement Awards

A compilation of the National Association for Court Management's Justice Achievement Awards from 2000-2011.

Trends Articles

Using Offender Risk and Needs Assessment at Sentencing This document provides guidance to help judges and others involved in the sentencing decision understand when and how to incorporate risk and needs assessment information into their decision making process. (2011)

General

A Statement Regarding Utah`s Indeterminate Sentencing System. (September 2006). This is a position statement from the Utah Sentencing Commission justifying their use of indeterminate sentencing.

After Prison: Roadblocks to Reentry. (2004). This report summarizes the findings of an exhaustive two-year study by the Legal Action Center (LAC) of the legal obstacles that people with criminal records face when they attempt to reenter society and become productive, law-abiding citizens. Our research found that people with criminal records seeking reentry face a daunting array of counterproductive debilitating and unreasonable roadblocks in almost every important aspect of life.

Roger K. Warren Arming the Courts with Research: Ten Evidence-Based Sentencing Initiatives to Control Crime and Reduce Costs. (May 2009). The 10 strategies outlined in this brief are adapted from a longer paper by Roger Warren that was originally published in a special 2007 issue of the Indiana Law Journal, entitled “Evidence-Based Practices and State Sentencing Policy: Ten Policy Initiatives to Reduce Recidivism."

Cheesman, Fred et al. Blended Sentencing in Minnesota: On Target for Justice and Public Safety?. (November 2002). 150 pages.

Blended sentencing in Minnesota emerged as a political compromise between those who wanted to emphasize public safety, punishment, and accountability of juvenile offenders, and those who wanted to maintain or strengthen the traditional juvenile justice system.

Warren, Roger K. Evidence-Based Practice to Reduce Recidivism. (2007).

This article reviews specific evidence based practices that are proven to reduce recidivism.

Ayers, Christopher, et al. Issues in Maryland Sentencing- Sentencing Policy and Pragmatism: Executive Summary. (December 2001). The research findings presented in this paper represent a thorough survey of information concerning state level sentencing policies and practices. The current investigation looked not only at states that use voluntary guideline systems similar to Maryland, but also jurisdictions that practice indeterminate sentencing, have presumptive guidelines, or utilize a mandatory system. We compare these different systems to gain understanding of the impacts of structured sentencing in terms of Maryland goals.

Ostrom, Brian, Matthew Kleiman. Fred Cheesman, and Randall Hansen. Offender Risk Assessment in Virginia. (August 2002). 131 pages. NCSC and Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission.

A three-stage evaluation: Process of Sentencing Reform Empirical Study of Diversion and Recidivism and Benefit-Cost Analysis.

Pruning Prisons: How Cutting Corrections Can Save Money and Protect Public Safety. (May 2009).

This policy brief advocates for the use of alternatives to confinement to curb the $50 billion annual correctional bill.

Stemen, Don Reconsidering Incarceration: New Directions for Reducing Crime. (January 2007). Current research on the relationship between incarceration and crime provides confusing and even contradictory guidance for policymakers. The most sophisticated analyses generally agree that increased incarceration rates have some effect on reducing crime, but the scope of that impact is limited: a 10 percent increase in incarceration is associated with a 2 to 4 percent drop in crime.

Sentencing Commission Contacts. (August 2003). NCSC Knowledge and Information Services.

List of state contacts for Sentencing Commissions.

Ostrom, Brian, Neal Kaunder, David Rottman and Meredith Peterson. Sentencing Digest: Examining Current Sentencing Issues and Policies. (September 1998).

Since the late 1970s, judicial discretion has been constrained by the creation of sentencing guidelines and other means for structuring the sentencing decisions. Some argue these limits unduly restrict a judge's ability to appropriately weigh the factors that play a role in sentencing, while others feel that additional measures, such as mandatory minimum sentencing laws, are needed to constrain judicial discretion further. Most current structured systems provide judges with bounded discretion during the sentencing decision process.

Rosenthal, Alan and Martha Weissman Sentencing for Dollars: The Financial Consequences of a Criminal Conviction. (February 2007). The financial penalties imposed, directly or indirectly, as a result of a criminal conviction, are among the least considered or analyzed of the collateral consequences. Driven by a combination of philosophical purposes – punishment, reparation, cost recovery, revenue production and cost shifting ; local governments, states and the federal government have come to impose a vast array of fines, fees, costs, penalties, surcharges, forfeitures, assessments reimbursements and restitutions that are levied against people convicted of criminal offenses.

Lubitz, Robin L., and Thomas W. Ross. Sentencing Guidelines: Reflections on the Future. (2001). Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, National Institute of Justice This article address the success of sentencing guidelines on criminal sentencing. The authors note that the legislating of sentencing guidelines have bipartisan support and are accepted by most as ideologically neutral. While the authors believe that the institution of sentencing guidelines have alleviated some of the disparities in sentencing, the success of the guidelines can only be judged according to the goals sought by the respective community. The authors address how the stated goals from one jurisdiction to another can vary significantly -- some want to decrease sentencing disparities, others want to efficiently allocate scarce correctional resources, and yet others want to "increase judicial accountability."

Kauder, Neal and Brian Ostrom. State Sentencing Guidelines: Profiles and Continuum. (2008).

This report is a comparative inquiry into how sentencing guidelines shape sentences of offenders.

Zatz, M. S. The Convergence of Race, Ethnicity, Gender, and Class on Court Decision-making: Looking Toward the 21st Century. (2000). Policies, Processes, and Decisions of the Criminal Justice System 3: 503 This article studies impact of race, gender, and class, on the prosecution of crack mothers and the O.J. Simpson trial. The author then investigates how these three factors influence judicial proceedings on a larger scale, specifically concerning the war on drugs, gangs, and trying youths as adults.

The Costs of Confinement: Why Good juvenile Justice Policies Make Good Fiscal Sense. (May 2009). This policy brief details how states can see a net reduction in costs associated with juvenile corrections by using more community based alternatives.

Smith, Gordon H. US Senate Bill 1287, Offset of State Judicial Debts Against Income Tax Refunds. (May 2007). This bill along with House Bill 6172 would allow state courts to intercept federal income tax refunds to cover fines, court costs, restitution and other financial penalties associated with criminal convictions. This legislation is pending as of 10/13/08.

Collateral Consequences

Abbreviated Chart for Criminal Defense Practitioners of the Immigration Consequences of Criminal Convictions under Maryland State Law. (November 2006). This chart reflects the opinion of the Maryland Office of the Public Defender as to the collateral effect that a conviction under Maryland law would have on a defendant's immigration status.

Johnson, Robert M. A. Collateral Consequences. (May 2001). The National District Attorneys Association Robert M. A. Johnson is the former president of the National Association of District Attorneys and addresses the issue of collateral consequences in the prosecutorial decision-making process.

Federal Statutes Imposing Collateral Consequences upon Conviction. The United Sates Department of Justice This article describes the possible collateral consequences caused by a criminal conviction, including impact on the right to vote, the ability to hold public office, immigration issues, firearm ownership, licensing issues, and federal benefits. The article also addresses the restoration of civil rights and the removal of legal disabilities under federal law.

American Bar Association Commission on Effective Criminal Sanctions. Internal Exile: The Collateral Consequences of Conviction in Federal Laws and Regulations. (2009). This study collects and describes the collateral consequences of a criminal conviction that arise under federal statutes and regulations.

Nicole D. Porter. Expanding the Vote: State Felony Disenfranchisement Reform, 1997-2010. (2010). This report provides an overview of reforms that have taken place since 1997. We find that since 1997, 23 states have amended felony disenfranchisement policies in an effort to reduce their restrictiveness and expand voter eligibility.

Working Paper on the Immigration Consequences of Guilty Pleas or Convictions in New York Courts. (May 2005). This report from the New York State Judicial Institute discusses the immigration consequences, which are often unknown to noncitizen defendants, of a guilty plea or conviction to even a minor offense.

Federal Court Cases

Blakely v. Washington. Legal Information Institute, Cornell University This case concerns a man who kidnapped his estranged wife and received a 90-month sentence after the judge determined that the man's crime was committed with excessive cruelty. The facts of the case warranted that the man receive a maximum sentence of 53 months. The issue in question for the Supreme Court case is that the facts of the case that caused the judge to give the man a 90-month sentence were not found by a jury nor were they petitioned in court and therefore violated the defendant's Sixth Amendment right.

Skove, Anne. Blakely v. Washington: Implications for State Courts. (July 2004). Knowledge and Information Services.

Impact on and reactions in the states to Blakely v. Washington.

California Supreme Court Decision: People Vs. Black. This thirty-one page 2005 decision from the California Supreme Court addresses the impact of Blakely and Booker on California's sentencing laws.

Liptak, Adam. Sentencing Decision`s Reach Is Far and Wide. (June 2004). The New York Times This article illustrates the impact of Blakely v. Washington on court cases across the country. This article restates the main issue of Blakely: "...any factor that increases a criminal sentence, except for prior convictions, to be proved to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt."

Mandatory Minimums

Tonry, Michael. Reconsidering Indeterminate and Structured Sentencing. (September 1999). National Institute of Justice, Sentencing and Corrections for the 21st Century, Papers from the Executive Sessions on Sentencing and Corrections 2 This article examines the disparities between sentencing procedures among localities.

Smith, Michael E., and Walter J. Dickey. Reforming Sentencing and Corrections for Just Punishment and Public Safety. (September 1999). National Institute of Justice, Sentencing and Corrections for the 21st Century, Papers from the Executive Sessions on Sentencing and Corrections 4 This online article discusses how simply incarcerating criminals does not promote public safety because it does not address the root of the social problems leading to the criminal acts in the first place.

Spohn, Cassia C. Thirty Years of Sentencing Reform: The Quest for a Racially Neutral Sentencing Process. (2000). Policies, Processes, and Decisions of the Criminal Justice System 3: 427 According to the author, racial discrimination continues to be a primary determinate in judicial sentencing disparities. He uses 40 studies in his article, including 32 at the state judicial level and 8 that address the federal judiciary.

Organizations

Criminal Sentencing Statistics. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics This web site includes information on 2002 incarceration statistics as well as a list of Bureau of Justice Statistics publications.

Death Penalty Information Center. The Death Penalty Information Center is a non-profit organization serving the media and the public with analysis and information on issues concerning capital punishment.

Families Against Mandatory Minimums. Families Against Mandatory Minimums (FAMM) is a national nonprofit organization founded in 1991 to challenge inflexible and excessive penalties required by mandatory sentencing laws. FAMM promotes sentencing policies that give judges the discretion to distinguish between defendants and sentence them according to their role in the offense, seriousness of the offense and potential for rehabilitation.

Pennsylvania Institute on Criminal Sentencing. The Pennsylvania Institute on Criminal Sentencing provides cutting-edge sentencing research and analysis with a particular emphasis on the laws and policy of Pennsylvania. The Institute also offers news, information and updates on Pennsylvania sentencing.

Kauder, Neal, Brian Ostrom, Meredith Peterson, and David Rottman. Sentencing Commission Profiles: State Sentencing Policy and Practice Research in Action Partnership. (1997).

Reference guide containing profiles of system designs employed by states' sentencing commissions.

Rottman, David B., et al. Tables 44-50: The Sentencing Context . (2006). Washington, DC: U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics These tables provide an overview of sentencing responsibilities, options, guidelines, civil disabilities for felons, and truth-in-sentencing laws in the states.

The Criminal Justice Policy Foundation. This is a private, non-profit educational organization that promotes solutions to the problems facing the criminal justice system.

The Sentencing Project. The Sentencing Project is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization which promotes decreased reliance on incarceration and increased use of more effective and humane alternatives.

United States Sentencing Commission. The Commission’s duties include developing guidelines for sentencing in federal courts; collecting data about crime and sentencing; and serving as a resource to Congress, the Executive Branch, and the Judiciary on crime and sentencing policy.

Sentencing Statistics

Peters, Tracy and Roger Warren. Getting Smarter About Sentencing: NCSC`s Sentencing Reform Survey. (January 2006).

The NCSC distributed a nine-question survey to the state chief justices and court administrators. This report describes the responses.

Durose, Matthew R. State Court Sentencing of Convicted Felons 2004 - Statistical Tables. (2004). This research presents statistics for adults who were convicted of a felony and sentenced in State courts. The data were collected through a survey of a nationally representative sample of State Courts in 300 counties in 2004.

The NCSC Sentencing Attitudes Survey: A Report on the Findings. (July 2006). Princeton Survey Research Associates International for NCSC

This report is based on the responses of 1,500 people surveyed via telephone to determine their attitudes about criminal sentencing.

Mauer, Marc and Ryan S. King. Uneven Justice: State Rates of Incarceration by Race and Ethnicity. (July 2007). This report examines racial and ethnic disparities by state, and finds substantial variation in the degree of black-to-white incarceration. The report finds that African Americans are incarcerated at nearly 6 times the rate of whites and Latinos at nearly double the rate.

Reaves, Brian A. Violent Felons in Large Urban Communities. (July 2006). This is a Bureau of Justice Statistics study of violent felony convictions in the 75 most populous counties found and the statistical characteristics of the offenders.

Truth in Sentencing

Ostrom, Brian, Charles Ostrom, Roger Hanson, and Matthew Kleiman. Assessing Consistency and Fairness in Sentencing: A Comparative Study in Three States. (2008).

New Study Finds State Guidelines Boost Consistency, Reduce Discrimination in Sentencing.

Brennan, Michael B., and Donald V. Latorraca. Truth-in-Sentencing Comes to Wisconsin. (2000). Wisconsin Lawyer: Official Publication of the State Bar of Wisconsin 73, no. 5: 14 This website has an article explaining the 1997 Wisconsin Act 283, which instituted the statewide Truth-in-Sentencing Program, and its ramifications. The article also has relevant Wisconsin statutes pertaining to the program.

Ditton, Paula M., and Doris James Wilson. Truth in Sentencing in State Prisons. (1999). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics Describes the development and implementation of truth in sentencing laws across the country. A study of prisons from 1990-1996 looks at time served in prison and average length for first-time offenders. This data is used to determine possible estimates under the Truth in Sentencing Laws for offenders to serve in prison of all races and both genders.

Ostrom, Brian, Fred Cheesman, Ann Jones, Meredith Peterson, and Neal Kaunder. Truth-in-Sentencing in Virginia: Evaluating the Process and Impact of Sentencing Reform.. (1999). NCSC and Virginia Criminal Sentencing Commission.

Truth-In-Sentencing (TIS) tries to minimize the disparity between the sentence given by the judge and the actual amount of time a prisoner serves. The objectives of the report are to analyze Virginia's development and implementation of TIS, forecast its impact, and evaluate the recidivism rates of Virginian offenders.