Author ORCID Identifier

Kay Levine 0000-0002-9422-232X

Ronald Wright 0009-0005-3591-9521

Document Type

Article

Publication Date

2023

Keywords

Resentencing initiatives, Case studies, Prosecutors, Defense attorneys, Sentencing, Procedural alternatives

Abstract

This Article offers the first scholarly assessment of new resentencing practices initiated by state prosecutors in the United States. Unlike the conviction integrity units that have become institutional fixtures in many prosecutors’ offices over the past two decades, attorneys working on resentencing matters rarely address concerns about the legal integrity or factual accuracy of the conviction itself. Prosecutors and defense attorneys instead consider the continuing integrity of the sentence imposed on the defendant. Perhaps a second look is necessary because the sentence imposed for the crime no longer appears necessary to serve public safety goals, because the prisoner has aged out of (or grown out of) criminal tendencies. Maybe the original sentence now appears disproportionate due to a shift in values and priorities for punishment. Or maybe the prisoner is now very expensive to house, due to illness and infirmity. Given the number of lengthy prison sentences being served in the United States, this expanded prosecutor function has transformative potential.

Both defense attorneys and prosecutors get involved in second look efforts. But we hesitate to say that these courtroom actors work together to achieve resentencing goals. The degree of cooperation on these matters varies by case and by jurisdiction, sometimes driven by the legal framework in which resentencing happens.

First Page

289

Publication Title

Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution

Download

Share

COinS