« New Human Rights Watch report bemoans "Nation Behind Bars" | Main | Elderly coke dealer, on his 90th birthday, gets 3-year prison sentence »

May 7, 2014

Examining "sentence finality" at length in new article and series of posts

I am pleased to report that an article I completed in conjunction with a wonderful symposium on "Finality in Sentencing" for the Wake Forest Journal of Law & Policy is now in print and available in full via this SSRN link.  

The full title of my article is "Re-Balancing Fitness, Fairness, and Finality for Sentences," and here is the abstract: 

This Essay examines the issue of “sentence finality” in the hope of encouraging more thorough and reflective consideration of the values and interests served — and not served — by doctrines, policies, and practices that may allow or preclude the review of sentences after they have been deemed final.  Drawing on American legal history and modern penal realities, this Essay highlights reasons why sentence finality has only quite recently become an issue of considerable importance.  This Essay also suggests that this history combines with modern mass incarceration in the United States to call for policy-makers, executive officials, and judges now to be less concerned about sentence finality, and to be more concerned about punishment fitness and fairness, when new legal developments raise doubts or concerns about lengthy prison sentences.

Regular readers know I have commented in the past in this space about my fear that too much stock and weight is often put on "sentence finality" (as distinct from "conviction finality"), and this article provided me the first real opportunity to think and write about this issue more thoroughly and systematically.  And yet I fear I am only scratching the surface of various important conceptual and practical issues in this Wake article; as a result, I may end up writing a lot more on this topic in the months and years.  

In service to my stated goal "to encouraging more thorough and reflective consideration of the values and interests served — and not served — by doctrines, policies, and practices that may allow or preclude the review of sentences after they have been deemed final," I am planning in the days ahead to reprint and discuss in separate posts a few of the ideas and themes that find expression in this article.  For now, I am hopeful that readers will check out the full article and perhaps let me know via comments if they find this topic of sufficient interest and importance so as to justify many additional posts on sentence finality.

May 7, 2014 at 11:43 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e201a73dbe2e42970d

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Examining "sentence finality" at length in new article and series of posts :

Comments

The abstract looks promising! As everyone may know, I'm an advocate of fundamentally transforming the sentencing portion to allow for two distinctively different sentences: one sentence dictating the terms of punishment (incarceration) to benefit the victim and the community, as well as a separate and distinct sentence to dictate reintegration (similar to parole) to benefit the offender and the community.

Hopefully your article will trend in that direction.

Posted by: Eric Knight | May 7, 2014 10:37:42 PM

Very informative blog
keep writing

Posted by: Bing Homepage Quiz | Jan 25, 2020 12:56:25 AM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB