Revisiting Prior Record Enhancement Provisions in State Sentencing Guidelines

The role of previous convictions at sentencing remains a contested question in sentencing theory, policy, and practice. Despite the intuitive appeal of using previous convictions to enhance sentences, prior convictions are harder to justify than crime seriousness as determinants of sentence severity...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Federal sentencing reporter 2014-02, Vol.26 (3), p.177-190
Main Authors: Roberts, Julian V., Yalincak, Orhun H.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Conviction records
Convictions
Criminal histories
Criminal justice
Criminal offenses
Criminal sentences
Criminal sentencing
Criminals
History
Prior convictions
Provisions
Recidivism
Sentenced offenders
Sentencing guidelines
Theory
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The role of previous convictions at sentencing remains a contested question in sentencing theory, policy, and practice. Despite the intuitive appeal of using previous convictions to enhance sentences, prior convictions are harder to justify than crime seriousness as determinants of sentence severity. In addition, criminal history has failed to attract as much attention from scholars as would be desirable, particularly at the level of state sentencing. In particular, few articles relate the structure of enhancements to the empirical literature on reoffending. Here, Roberts and Yalincak revisit the use of criminal history provisions in selected state guideline systems, and raises a number of questions about the current structure of PR enhancements.
ISSN:1053-9867
1533-8363
DOI:10.1525/fsr.2014.26.3.177