Sentencing Principles in Theory and Practice

In Norval Morris's "limiting retributivist" theory of punishment, considerations of "just deserts" set upper and occasionally lower limits on sentencing severity. Other purposes, including general deterrence, considerations of equality, and "parsimony," provide the necessary "fine-tuning." Proponents of just deserts, such as Andrew von Hirsch, give much greater weight to retributive and equality values and would allow almost no role for other sentencing goals in the determination of the severity of individual sentences. The relative severity of sentences must be closely linked to desert, and parsimony should only be considered in determining issues such as the overall severity of the sentencing scale. Minnesota's sentencing guidelines, in effect since 1980, are based on a theory of just deserts, but also give substantial weight to utilitarian sentencing purposes. This was true even of the original guidelines and is more true today. The theory of punishment that has evolved is quite similar to Morris's theory and quite different from von Hirsch's. Minnesota's fifteen-year experience with guidelines shows that Morris's theory of punishment is both theoretically sound and practically viable.