After reading about the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 and the subsequent adjustments ordered by the Supreme Court, consider how these changes impact an individual judge’s view of a “reasonable sentence.” Then, in a post to the discussion board, answer these questions:
Describe how you would tell a “reasonable” sentence from an unreasonable one—what are the hallmarks of a reasonable sentence?
How does a forensic psychologist’s sentencing evaluation affect what would be considered a “reasonable sentence”?
After reading about the changes to the Sentencing Reform Act, do you agree with the Supreme Court decisions to grant more discretion to federal judges? Why or why not?

Respond to your classmates’ posts, discussing the criteria your classmates laid out for what constitutes a “reasonable” sentence and how that agrees or disagrees with your ideas on that topic. Also comment on classmates’ views on the appropriateness and effect of the Supreme Court decisions that modified the practices put forth in the SRA.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/history/encyclopedias-… – summary of sentencing reform act

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic… – sentencing guidelines ‘reasonable,’ justices rule

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/10/washington/10cnd… – court restores sentencing powers of federal judges