Abstract This paper shall is an examination of the effectiveness of sentencing guidelines. The performance measures of the sentencing guidelines are two-fold, first their abilitity to meet the goals of the legislators that enacted the sentencing guidelines, the addressing of inequities in sentencing, perceived leniency, and unintended consequences. The second part of the analysis is the evaluation on the basis of meeting the goals of the criminal justice system, deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation. A general conclusion on the effectiveness of sentencing guideline is made. Sentencing Guidelines (Part II) Policy Evaluation As noted above the aim of the criminal justice system is to reduce crime in society, this often accomplished...The end:
.....ing Disparity. The Journal of Criminal Law & Justice, 90 (1), p.239-306. Krauss, D. (2004). Adjusting Risk of Recidivism: Do Judicial Departures Worsen or Improve Recidivism Prediction Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines? Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 22 (6), 731-750. Marvell, T. (1995). Sentencing Guidelines and Prison Population Growth. Journal of Criminal Law & Criminology, 85 (3), 696-709. Schanzenbach, M. and Tiller, E. (2008). Reviewing the Sentencing Guidelines: Judicial Politics, Empirical Evidence, and Reform. University of Chicago Law Review, 75 (2), 715-760. Tiede, L. (2009). The Swinging Pendulum of Sentencing Reform: Political Actors Regulating District Court Discretion. BYU Journal of Public Law, 24 (1), 1-47.