Resources

Further Reading

• Three strikes and you're out': Are repeat offender laws having their anticipated effects?, Clark, John, Austin, James, and Henry, D. Alan, 81: 144-149 (Jan.-Feb. '98, AJS Judicature)
• ABA commission to review sentences, prison conditions (brief), Richert, David, 87: 193 (Jan.-Feb. '04, AJS Judicature)
• Another vacancy crisis (editorial), Editorial, AJS, 82: 152 (Jan.-Feb. '99, AJS Judicature)
• As Definite Sentencing Begins, Illinois Still Debates Its Value (news), Author, No, 61: 384-385 (Mar. '78, AJS Judicature)
• Asking the Right Questions (letter), Johns, Josephine W., 67: 264, 306 (Dec.-Jan. '84, AJS Judicature)
• Author's Reply (letter), Kramer, John H., 71: 358 (Apr.-May '88, AJS Judicature)
• Author's Response (letter), Snellenburg, Sidney C., 71: 133 (Oct.-Nov. '87, AJS Judicature)
• Bronx court focuses on nonviolent crimes (brief), Buzynski, Dawn, 89: 91 (Sept.-Oct. '05, AJS Judicature)
• Building A Sentencing Reform Agenda: The ABA's New Sentencing Standards, Reitz, Kevin R. and Reitz, Curtis R., 78: 189-195 (Jan.-Feb. '95, AJS Judicature)
• Can Pretrial Release Programs Provide Help for Overcrowded Jails? (query), Mahoney, Michael J., 67: 110-111, 151-153 (Sep. '83, AJS Judicature)
• The capital jury: is it tilted toward death?, Bowers, William J., 79: 220-223 (Mar.-Apr. '96, AJS Judicature)
• The Case for Judicial Discretion in Sentencing, Evans, Walter and Gilbert, Frank, 61: 66-69 (Aug. '77, AJS Judicature)
• Cocaine sentencing and bad chemistry, Zedeck, Morris S., 84: 86-89 (Sept.-Oct. '00, AJS Judicature)
• Community Sentencing Lets Offenders Repay Society (focus), Abrahams, Steven, 65: 378-380 (Feb. '82, AJS Judicature)
• A Conversation Between A Judge and His Friend Concerning Whether the Judge Should Sentence A Defendant to Death, Ledewitz, Bruce, 71: 7-12 (Jun.-Jul. '87, AJS Judicature)
• Correction (letter), Dierdoff, David R., 62: 56 (Aug. '78, AJS Judicature)
• Correction (letter), Hallock, Walter E., Jr., 64: 4 (Jun.-Jul. '80, AJS Judicature)
• Corrections, Author, No, 64: 252 (Dec.-Jan. '81, AJS Judicature)
• Crime and incarceration (brief), Richert, David, 84: 103 (Sept.-Oct. '00, AJS Judicature)
• Criminal Sentencing in Transition, Gottfredson, Don M., 68: 125-127 (Oct.-Nov. '84, AJS Judicature)
• Criminal Sentencing: A Game of Chance, Kennedy, Edward M., 60: 208-215 (Dec. '76, AJS Judicature)
• Critical Issues In The Courtroom: Exploring a Hypothetical Case, Author, No, 72: 12-22 (Jun.-Jul. '88, AJS Judicature)
• Cultural considerations in motions and sentencing, Connell, James G, III, 92: 212-215, 248 (6, AJS Judicature)
• Determinate Sentencing and Plea Bargaining (letter), Nagel, Stuart S., 64: 108 (Sep. '80, AJS Judicature)
• The Development of Appellate Sentence Review in Alaska, DiPietro, Susanne, 75: 143-153 (Oct-Nov '91, AJS Judicature)
• Do Sex Offender Treatment Programs Work? (focus), Finn, Peter, 78: 250-252 (Mar.-Apr. '95, AJS Judicature)
• Electronic Monitorning and Recidivism (letter), Clarke, Stevens H., 76: 213 (Dec.-Jan. '93, AJS Judicature)
• Electronic Monitorning of Drug Offenders on Probation, Glaser, Daniel and Watts, Ronald, 76: 112-117 (Oct.-Nov. '92, AJS Judicature)
• An Examination of the Victim's Role at Sentencing: Results of a Survey of Probation Administrators, McLeod, Maureen, 71: 162-168 (Oct.-Nov. '87, AJS Judicature)
• Exploring judicial behaviors in the laboratories of democracy, Wolff, Michael A., 83: 267-269 (Mar.-Apr. '00, AJS Judicature)
• The extravagance of imprisonment revisited, Vuong, Linh, Hartney, Christopher, Krisberg, Barry, and Marchionna, Susan, 94: 70-80 (sep-oct '10, AJS Judicature)
• The Fiction of Corporate Crime (letter), Diamond, Hymen, 78: 220 (Mar.-Apr. '95, AJS Judicature)
• Flat Time Sentences Grow In Popularity (news), Hoelzel, Bill, 60: 244-246 (Dec. '76, AJS Judicature)
• Florida's Sentencing Guidelines: Surviving – But Just Barely, Holten, N. Gary and Handberg, Roger, 73: 259-267 (Feb.-Mar. '90, AJS Judicature)
• Glaser and Watts Respond (letter), Glaser, Daniel and Watts, Ronald, 76: 213-214 (Dec.-Jan. '93, AJS Judicature)
• A Helpful and Timely Reminder (letter), Scheb, John M., 68: 5 (Jun.-Jul. '84, AJS Judicature)
• How judges respond to drunk drivers, Breer, M. Lynn, Schwartz, Abby, Schillo, Barbara A., and Savage, Deborah, 87: 72-78, 89 (Sept.-Oct. '03, AJS Judicature)
• How One Judge Uses Alternative Sentencing, McCarty, Francis, 60: 316-317 (Feb. '77, AJS Judicature)
• Illinois High Court Sets New Limits for Judicial Discipline Commission (news), Author, No, 61: 382-383 (Mar
  . '78, AJS Judicature)
• Improving collection of court-ordered restitution, Davis, Robert C. and Bannister, Tanya M., 79: 30-33 (July-Aug. '95, AJS Judicature)
• Increasing Offender Compliance with Restitution Orders, Davis, Robert C., Smith, Barbara, and Hillenbrand, Susan, 74: 245-248 (Feb.-Mar. '91, AJS Judicature)
• Is Determinate Sentencing An Illusory Reform?, Orland, Leonard, 62: 381-389 (Mar. '79, AJS Judicature)
• Is the End of Judicial Sentencing In Sight?, Kress, Jack M., Wilkins, Leslie T., and Gottfredson, Don M., 60: 216-228 (Dec. '76, AJS Judicature)
• Is There A Reasonable Alternative to the Death Penalty? (query), Snellenburg, Sidney C., 71: 5-6 (Jun.-Jul. '87, AJS Judicature)
• Is There No Alternative To The Hard Line In Juvenile Justice? (query), Conrad, John, 67: 162-163, 203-206 (Oct. '83, AJS Judicature)
• Issues in judicial independence and accountability, Author, No, 88: 114-121 (Nov.-Dec. '04, AJS Judicature)
• It is time to end the war on drugs (editorial), no, author, 93: 48, 83 (1, 2, AJS Judicature)
• It's Time to Rehabilitate the Sentencing Process, McKay, Robert, 60: 223-228 (Dec. '76, AJS Judicature)
• Judicial override in Alabama: a singular example in death sentencing (brief), Ream, Michael Ream, 95: 49 (July-Aug '11, AJS Judicature)
• Judicial Responses to Prison Crowding, Finn, Peter, 67: 318, 325 (Feb. '84, AJS Judicature)
• Judicial Sentencing Guidelines: Hazards of the Middle Ground, Carrow, Deborah M., 68: 161-170 (Oct.-Nov. '84, AJS Judicature)
• Justice, Not Therapy: A New Mission for Corrections, Fogel, David F., 62: 372-380 (Mar. '79, AJS Judicature)
• Local Response to Prison Crowding (letter), Cramer, Judith A., 68: 4-5 (Jun.-Jul. '84, AJS Judicature)
• Mainstream sentencing—The urgent need for dramatic reform (devil's advocate), Wolff, Michael A. and De, Muniz, Paul, J., 92: 165-166 (4, AJS Judicature)
• A Major and Minor Issue (letter), Tonry, Michael, 71: 358 (Apr.-May '88, AJS Judicature)
• Making Criminals Pay (letter), Brown, Ray C., 64: 299, 336 (Feb. '81, AJS Judicature)
• Maryland's Sentencing Guidelines – A System By and For Judges, Levin, Marshall A., 68: 172-180 (Oct.-Nov. '84, AJS Judicature)
• Mr. Kellogg Responds (letter), Kellogg, Frederick R., 66: 326 (Feb. '83, AJS Judicature)
• A New Look At Restitution: Recent Legislation, Programs and Research, Chesney, Steve, Hudson, Joe, and McLagen, John, 61: 348-357 (Mar. '78, AJS Judicature)
• North Carolina's Determinate Sentencing Legislation, Clarke, Stevens H., 68: 140-152 (Oct.-Nov. '84, AJS Judicature)
• Not Persuaded (letter), Paternoster, Paul F., 71: 132-133 (Oct.-Nov. '87, AJS Judicature)
• Obvious Predictability (letter), Ward, William B., 68: 304 (Feb.-Mar. '85, AJS Judicature)
• On The Ripon Society Proposal (letter), Rosenbloom, Noah S., 66: 281 (Feb. '83, AJS Judicature)
• An open letter to the new president about the administration of justice (editorial), Editorial, AJS, 84: 172 (Jan.-Feb. '01, AJS Judicature)
• An Open Letter to the New President About the Administration of Justice (editorial), Editorial, AJS, 76: 168-169 (Dec.-Jan. '93, AJS Judicature)
• Part-Time Imprisonment: The Legal and Practical Issues of Periodic Confinement, Parisi, Nicolette, 63: 385-395 (Mar. '80, AJS Judicature)
• Pennsylvania House Rejects Mandatory Sentencing Bill (news), Author, No, 60: 301 (Jan. '77, AJS Judicature)

• Resources

  Further Reading

  • Information about Sentencing in the Gale Encyclopedia of American Law.

  Labeling Focal Concerns Theory in relation to Crime and Race

  Labeling Focal Concerns Theory is included in the Encyclopedia of Race and Crime (1), beginning with: According to focal concerns theory, three focal concerns have an effect on sentencing decisions: blameworthiness of the offender, protection of the community, and organizational restraints and consequences. Minorities are more likely to be labeled negatively when appearing in court based upon these three focal concerns. Debate has occurred on how prevalent this labeling is as well as how it might impact the sentencing and punishment of minority defendants. The entry examines the three focal concerns and how this labeling process results in disparities in minority sentencing and punishment. The focal concerns perspective is a theoretical framework which states that judges sentence individuals based upon perceptions and stereotypes surrounding three foci. The first focus is how blameworthy the offender is. This focus reflects the nature and seriousness of the offense, the offender’s involvement with the offense, and the offender’s previous record.

  Race, Sentencing and the “Tough on Crime Movement”

  In the context of justice on trials in the United States, civilrights.org publishes the following: reviews the issue of sentencing, and describes the role of Congress and other legislative bodies in shaping and implementing criminal justice policies that fall short of our commitment to equal treatment under the law. The decision to sentence a convicted criminal to prison has, until recently, been viewed as a profound responsibility, one entrusted solely to impartial judges. Increasingly, however, sentencing has become mundane and mechanistic, a decision effectively controlled by legislators, prosecutors and sentencing commissioners. This change in the culture of sentencing has had disastrous consequences for minorities in the United States.

  One of the most thorough studies of sentencing disparities was undertaken by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, which studied felony sentencing outcomes in New York courts between 1990 and 1992. The State concluded that one-third of minorities sentenced to prison would have received a shorter or non-incarcerative sentence if they had been treated like similarly situated white defendants. If probation-eligible blacks had been treated like their white counterparts, more than 8000 fewer black defendants would have received prison in that two year period, resulting in a five percent decline in the percentage of blacks sentenced to jail as a percentage of the entire sentenced population. In short, the study found, blacks are sentenced to prison more frequently than whites for the same conduct.

  Resources

  Notes and References

  1. Entry about Labeling Focal Concerns Theory in the Encyclopedia of Race and Crime

  See Also

  Sentencing in relation to Crime and Race

  Sentencing is included in the Encyclopedia of Race and Crime (1), beginning with: Sentencing is the imposition of punishment. After a defendant pleads guilty to a crime or is convicted as the result of a trial, the focus shifts from prosecution to the sanctioning of guilty defendants. The judge imposes the sanctions on the defendant. The punishment of guilty defendants has philosophical justifications and occurs as the result of a codified process. Despite the philosophical justifications and structured process, some research suggests that there is disparity and discrimination in sentencing. The research findings helped spur a 30-year reform movement. Some of the reforms appear to be at least partially successful. Despite the success of some reforms, research continues to identify race-related sentencing disparity. A number of sentencing-related cases mark the legal landscape in the early 21st century, with the continuing goal of amending the sentencing process to ensure that it is consistent with the protections of the Constitution of the United States.

  Race, Sentencing and the “Tough on Crime Movement”

  In the context of justi
  ce on trials in the United States, civilrights.org publishes the following: reviews the issue of sentencing, and describes the role of Congress and other legislative bodies in shaping and implementing criminal justice policies that fall short of our commitment to equal treatment under the law. The decision to sentence a convicted criminal to prison has, until recently, been viewed as a profound responsibility, one entrusted solely to impartial judges. Increasingly, however, sentencing has become mundane and mechanistic, a decision effectively controlled by legislators, prosecutors and sentencing commissioners. This change in the culture of sentencing has had disastrous consequences for minorities in the United States.

  One of the most thorough studies of sentencing disparities was undertaken by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services, which studied felony sentencing outcomes in New York courts between 1990 and 1992. The State concluded that one-third of minorities sentenced to prison would have received a shorter or non-incarcerative sentence if they had been treated like similarly situated white defendants. If probation-eligible blacks had been treated like their white counterparts, more than 8000 fewer black defendants would have received prison in that two year period, resulting in a five percent decline in the percentage of blacks sentenced to jail as a percentage of the entire sentenced population. In short, the study found, blacks are sentenced to prison more frequently than whites for the same conduct.

  Resources

  Notes and References

  1. Entry about Sentencing in the Encyclopedia of Race and Crime

  See Also

  Sentencing and Sanctions in the Criminal Justice System