Annual report - Criminal Sentencing Commission.

Report year ends Feb. 28.

Sentencing Guidelines, Judicial Discretion, And Social Values

This paper studies the institutional structure of criminal sentencing, focusing on the interaction between legislatures, which set sentencing ranges ex ante, and judges, who choose actual sentences from within those ranges ex post. The key question concerns the optimal degree of judicial discretion, given the sequential nature of the process and the possibly divergent interests of legislatures and judges regarding the social function of criminal punishment. The enactment of sentencing reform in the 1970s and 80s provides both a context for the model and an opportunity to evaluate its conclusions.

Interim report /

Mode of access: Internet.

Indeterminate and determinate sentencing : criminal justice issues before the first Special Session, October 24, 1977 : House Republican Committee Staff report /

Issued September, 1977.

Society of Legal Scholars Criminal Justice Section Response to Sexual Offences Guideline Consultation (Sentencing Council Consultation 2012-2013)

Consultation Report

Bridging the Conceptualization of Youth with Intellectual Disabilities to Sentencing under the YCJA

The current study examined how disability and the concepts of risk, need and responsivity are understood by criminal justice professionals and inform their perceptions of young offenders with ID at sentencing under the ‘different but equal’ philosophy. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 lawyers and 8 mental health workers across 6 major urban areas in Ontario. Participants primarily perceived ID through a medical discourse, overlooking social and structural barriers that, in some cases, may hinder adherence to sentencing dispositions. Specifically, participants discussed balancing the reduced culpability of offenders (e.g., intent) – justifying lenient sentencing – with public safety concerns (i.e., ID viewed as a barrier to rehabilitation) – justifying increasing the severity of sentences. Participants assessed clients with ID and their risks, needs and responsivity within the context of other legal factors: criminal history, severity of the offence, and YCJA objectives. Participants articulated the importance of tailored courthouse identification programs, services/funding, and education/training.

Crack and powder cocaine federal legislation: A sentencing disparity and potential for policy improvement

Since its introduction into the United States in the 1980s, crack cocaine has been a harsh epidemic that has taken its toll on a countless number of people. This highly addictive, cheap and readily available drug of abuse has permeated many demographic sectors, mostly in low income, lesser educated, and urban communities. This epidemic of crack cocaine use in inner city areas across the Unites States has been described as an expression of economic marginality and “social suffering” coupled with the local and international forces of drug market economies (Agar 2003). As crack cocaine is a derivative of cocaine, it utilizes the psychoactive component of the drug, but delivers it in a much stronger, quicker, and more addictive fashion. This, coupled with its ready availability and cheap price has allowed for users to not only become very addicted very quickly, but to be subject to the stringent and sometimes unequal or inconsistent punishments for possession and distribution of crack-cocaine. ^ There are many public health and social ramifications from the abuse of crack-cocaine, and these epidemics appear to target low income and minority groups. Public health issues relating to the physical, mental, and economic strain will be addressed, as well as the direct and indirect effects of the punishments that come as a result of the disparity in penalties for cocaine and crack-cocaine possession and distribution. ^ Three new policies have recently been introduced into the United Stated Congress that actively address the disparity in sentencing for drug and criminal activities. They are, (1) Powder-Crack Cocaine Penalty Equalization Act of 2009, (HR 18, 111th Cong. 2009), (2) The Drug Sentencing Reform and Cocaine Kingpin Trafficking Act of 2009, (HR 265, 111th Cong. 2009) and (3) The Justice Integrity Act of 2009, (111th Cong. 2009). ^ Although they have only been initiated, if passed, they have potential to not only eliminate the crack-cocaine disparity, but to enact laws that help those affected by this epidemic. The final and overarching goal of this paper is to analyze and ultimately choose the ideal policy that would not only eliminate the cocaine and crack disparity regardless of current or future state statutes, but will provide the best method of rehabilitation, prevention, and justice. ^

Improving the administration of justice by authorizing the Judicial Conference of the United States to establish institutes and joint councils on sentencing, to provide additional methods of sentencing ... : report [to accompany H.J. Res. 424]

Submitted by Mr. Willis, and ordered to be printed, June 23, 1958.

CHRI user's manual : criminal history record information /

This guide provides examples of juvenile and adult arrest fingerprint cards with instructions and additional record forms.

Impact analysis : proposed "Truth-in-sentencing" legislation.

"June 1994."

Sentencing review 2014-2015

Modos de intervención criminal punible en crímenes de atrocidad: un análisis jurídico-penal a partir de los aportes de la criminología

790 p.

New perspectives on A.I. in sentencing. Human decision-making between risk assessment tools and protection of humans rights.

The aim of this thesis is to investigate a field that until a few years ago was foreign to and distant from the penal system. The purpose of this undertaking is to account for the role that technology could plays in the Italian Criminal Law system. More specifically, this thesis attempts to scrutinize a very intricate phase of adjudication. After deciding on the type of an individual's liability, a judge must decide on the severity of the penalty. This type of decision implies a prognostic assessment that looks to the future. It is precisely in this field and in prognostic assessments that, as has already been anticipated in the United, instruments and processes are inserted in the pre-trial but also in the decision-making phase. In this contribution, we attempt to describe the current state of this field, trying, as a matter of method, to select the most relevant or most used tools. Using comparative and qualitative methods, the uses of some of these instruments in the supranational legal system are analyzed. Focusing attention on the Italian system, an attempt was made to investigate the nature of the element of an individual's ‘social dangerousness’ (pericolosità sociale) and capacity to commit offences, types of assessments that are fundamental in our system because they are part of various types of decisions, including the choice of the best sanctioning treatment. It was decided to turn our attention to this latter field because it is believed that the judge does not always have the time, the means and the ability to assess all the elements of a subject and identify the best 'individualizing' treatment in order to fully realize the function of Article 27, paragraph 3 of the Constitution.