Methodological Problems in Studies of Sentencing
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 4085282 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Hans Zeisel (University of Chicago, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1969 |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 621-631 |
| Publication date | 1969-05-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Law & Society Review (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0023-9216 • E-ISSN: 1540-5893 |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.2307/3052753 |
| OpenAlex | W1993893117 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
The law, especially Anglo-American law, gives as a rule wide latitude to the determination of the sentence that follows the conviction of a defendant. The law may set the minimum or maximum sentence for the particular crime, it may set the range, or it may allow different types of sentences (fine, prison, etc.); at the very least, it provides a choice between two alternatives, for instance, after conviction of a capital crime, it now allows in most states a finding of death or life in prison.As a rule it is the judge who determines the sentence, but in capital cases, and in some states in other cases, it is the jury. In one state, California, it is the prison authority to whom the sentencing decision falls, the judge merely pronounces sentence in terms of the range set by the penal code. But wherever the discretionary power lies, discretion is almost unlimited. Very seldom will an appellate court impinge on this discretion and change the sentence
Criminology · Political science · Sociology · Crime Patterns and Interventions · Criminal Justice and Corrections Analysis · Psychology · Psychopathy, Forensic Psychiatry, Sexual Offending
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,04 |
| Citation span | 1978 - 2019 (42) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |