About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

17 Crim. L.F. 1 (2006)

handle is hein.journals/crimlfm17 and id is 1 raw text is: Criminal Law Forum (2006) 17:1-41 © Springer 2006 DOI 10.1007/s10609-006-9003-8 RASMUS H. WANDALL* EQUALITY BY NUMBERS OR WORDS: A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF SENTENCING STRUCTURES IN MINNESOTA AND IN DENMARK There is a widespread and decades' long movement towards structuring and rationalizing criminal sentencing decision-making, in Europe as well as in North America.1 Since 1978 at least 18 states and the federal jurisdiction in the USA have implemented sentencing guidelines.2 The most discussed of these, the federal sentencing guidelines system, was held unconstitutional in January 2005, open- ing up for new challenges of sentencing reform.3 In the recent green paper on criminal sanctions in the European Union, curtailing sen- tencing discretion was identified as an important area of action.4 This * Assistant Research Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Copenhagen and Criminal Justice Research Fellow, New York University School of Law (2005-2006); Cand. Jur., Ph.D. The research is funded in part by the Royal Danish Research Council (Grant ( 24-04-0350). The article was prepared during a Global Research Fellowship at New York University, School of Law, 2004-2005, and was initially presented at a Global Fellows' Forum at NYU in April 2005 and later at the Nordic Criminal Law Workshop, Freiburg, Germany, 2005. I am most grateful to Lotte Machon, Joseph Weiler, David Garland, James J. Jacobs, Julian V. Roberts, Bar- bara Tombs, Malcolm M. Feeley, Roger Hartley, Eva Pils, Vagn Greve, Jorn Vestergaard and the anonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier drafts and for discussions of issues raised in the article. Moreover, I am very grateful to Richard S. Frase for hosting me at the University of Minnesota Law School and for his insights and comments to an earlier draft. An earlier version appeared as Global Working Paper 03/05, New York University School of Law. ' See e.g. Michael Tonry, Punishment Policies and Patterns in Western Countries, in SENTENCING AND SANCTIONS IN WESTERN COUNTRIES, 3 (Michael Tonry & Richard S. Frase eds., 2001); Hans-Jurgen Albrecht, Post-Adjudication Dispositions in Com- parative Perspective, in SENTENCING AND SANCTIONS IN WESTERN COUNTRIES, supra, at 293. 2 Richard S. Frase, State Sentencing Guidelines: Diversity, Consensus, and Unresolved Policy Issues, 105 COLUM. L. REV. 1190, 1191 (2005). 3 United States v. Booker, 125 S.Ct. 738 U.S. 2005. 4 Green Paper on the approximation, mutual recognition and enforcement of criminal sanctions in the European Union, 7-9, 9-12, 47-48, Com(2004)334 final.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most