Fernandez v. United States · ¶77

Before 1984, “the Federal Government employed in criminal cases a system of indeterminate sentencing.” Mistretta v. United States, 488 U. S. 361, 363 (1989). Though “[s]tatutes specified the penalties for crimes,” they “nearly always gave the sentencing judge wide discretion to decide whether the offender should be incarcerated and for how long” or “whether restraint, such as probation, should be imposed instead of imprisonment or fine.” Ibid. The result: “great variation among sentences imposed by different judges upon similarly situated offenders” and “uncertainty as to the time the offender would spend in prison.” Id., at 366.

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.