Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The New Politics of Sentencing

The New Politics of Sentencing G U E S T E D I T O R ' S O B S E R VAT I O N S MICHAEL M. O'HEAR Assistant Professor, Marquette University Law School With this Issue, the Fede ral Sentencing Reporter concludes its two-issue survey of recent sentencing reform developments at the state level. The previous Issue focused on drug reforms, particularly a series of ballot initiatives in four states mandating treatment in lieu of incarceration for lowlevel drug offenders.1 The present Issue places those developments in a broader context. Within the past two years, more than a dozen states have adopted important sentencing reforms. Surprisingly, given the general trajectory of sentencing law over the past three decades, most of the current state-level reforms are calculated to reduce sentence lengths (albeit sometimes rather obliquely). Perhaps most notably, legislatures have scaled back mandatory minimums in Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana, and North Dakota. Thus, one can now ask with a straight face the question posed by Marc Mauer in this Issue: ÒIs the get-tough era in sentencing coming to a close?Ó Recent state reforms may indeed suggest a fundamental change in sentencing politics. Not coincidentally, however, they have occurred during a period http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Federal Sentencing Reporter University of California Press

The New Politics of Sentencing

Federal Sentencing Reporter , Volume 15 (1) – Oct 1, 2002

Loading next page...
 
/lp/university-of-california-press/the-new-politics-of-sentencing-CNaeNupS98

References (3)

Publisher
University of California Press
Copyright
Copyright © by the University of California Press
Subject
Research Article
ISSN
1053-9867
eISSN
1533-8363
DOI
10.1525/fsr.2002.15.1.3
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

G U E S T E D I T O R ' S O B S E R VAT I O N S MICHAEL M. O'HEAR Assistant Professor, Marquette University Law School With this Issue, the Fede ral Sentencing Reporter concludes its two-issue survey of recent sentencing reform developments at the state level. The previous Issue focused on drug reforms, particularly a series of ballot initiatives in four states mandating treatment in lieu of incarceration for lowlevel drug offenders.1 The present Issue places those developments in a broader context. Within the past two years, more than a dozen states have adopted important sentencing reforms. Surprisingly, given the general trajectory of sentencing law over the past three decades, most of the current state-level reforms are calculated to reduce sentence lengths (albeit sometimes rather obliquely). Perhaps most notably, legislatures have scaled back mandatory minimums in Connecticut, Indiana, Louisiana, and North Dakota. Thus, one can now ask with a straight face the question posed by Marc Mauer in this Issue: ÒIs the get-tough era in sentencing coming to a close?Ó Recent state reforms may indeed suggest a fundamental change in sentencing politics. Not coincidentally, however, they have occurred during a period

Journal

Federal Sentencing ReporterUniversity of California Press

Published: Oct 1, 2002

There are no references for this article.