No Indeterminate Sentencing Without Parole

42 Pages Posted: 27 May 2017 Last revised: 23 Feb 2019

See all articles by Kevin Morrow

Kevin Morrow

Independent

Katherine Puzauskas

Arizona State University (ASU) - Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law

Date Written: May 5, 2017

Abstract

This article looks critically at Arizona’s indeterminate sentencing system that survived after the elimination of parole in Arizona in 1993. It begins by exploring the purpose and history of indeterminate sentencing and parole as well as its earliest constitutional challenges and eventual decline. Next it compares two commonly confused forms of “release”: parole and executive clemency. The article then examines the three types of defendants and the potential consequences if Arizona does not reestablish parole for its indeterminate sentences: death row defendants denied parole eligibility instructions at trial, defendants whose plea agreement includes parole and defendants sentenced to parole at trial. Finally, the article argues that without parole, Arizona’s indeterminate sentences should be ruled unconstitutional.

Keywords: Arizona, Parole, Clemency, Sentencing

Suggested Citation

Morrow, Kevin and Puzauskas, Katherine, No Indeterminate Sentencing Without Parole (May 5, 2017). 44 Ohio N.U. L. Rev. 263 (2018), Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2974386 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2974386

Kevin Morrow (Contact Author)

Independent ( email )

Phoenix, AZ

Katherine Puzauskas

Arizona State University (ASU) - Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law ( email )

Box 877906
Tempe, AZ 85287-7906
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
132
Abstract Views
768
rank
310,621
PlumX Metrics