How Much Punishment Is Enough?: Embracing Uncertainty in Modern Sentencing Reform

Jefferson-Bullock, Jalila

Journal: Journal of Law and Policy

Volume: 24

Year: 2016

Bluebook Citation: 24 J. L. & POL'Y (2016)

Author: Jalila Jefferson-Bullock: all 3 publications


Abstract

This article examines federal sentencing reform and embraces the principle of uncertainty in this process. In order to properly reapportion federal criminal sentencing laws, reformers must account for the impracticality of determining appropriate incarceration lengths at sentencing. Thus, this article proposes an alternative federal sentencing model that includes a sentencing effectiveness assessment tool to help lawmakers implement rational sentences that appropriately punish offenders, prepare them to successfully reenter society, and reduce recidivism rates. Modern sentencing reform should adopt constant review and evaluation of sentencing to measure effectiveness and ensure that appropriate sentences are implemented to avoid the pitfalls of an archaic sentencing regime.

Law and policy makers should engage with research and sound logic to alleviate overcrowded prisons, reduce prison costs, ensure that prisoners are rehabilitated and fit to successfully reenter society, and that prisoners are appropriately and safely punished.

Chat with this journal article using AI

Ask CiteLaw's AI Navigator anything about this journal article, verify citations, and research related authorities. Sign up for CiteLaw free today to get started.