Download this Paper Open PDF in Browser

Sentencing Option: Why Restrict Judges?

Wisconsin Lawyer, Vol. 83, No. 9, September 2010

Univ. of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1138

6 Pages Posted: 10 Oct 2010  

Kenneth Streit

University of Wisconsin Law School

John Chisholm

Independent

Date Written: October 7, 2010

Abstract

Dissatisfaction with parts of the indeterminate (parole) sentencing system led many states, including Wisconsin, to totally eliminate this and substitute a Truth-in-Sentencing system. After a decade with the new system, there are also many problems including difficulty in arranging programs, overcrowding and banishing the concept of rehabilitation. An adjustment would be to provide judges with both options at the time of sentencing so that the most serious offenders would be serving the fullest sentence while others would have earlier access to treatment and possible earned release.

Keywords: prison, prisoners, prison crowding, parole, sentencing, truth-in-sentencing, determinate sentence, treatment, rehabilitation, corrections

JEL Classification: K14

Suggested Citation

Streit, Kenneth and Chisholm, John, Sentencing Option: Why Restrict Judges? (October 7, 2010). Wisconsin Lawyer, Vol. 83, No. 9, September 2010; Univ. of Wisconsin Legal Studies Research Paper No. 1138. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1688992 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1688992

Kenneth Streit (Contact Author)

University of Wisconsin Law School ( email )

975 Bascom Mall
Madison, WI 53706
United States

John Chisholm

Independent

No Address Available

Paper statistics

Downloads
65
Rank
293,490
Abstract Views
572