The Model Penal Code took 300 years of American criminal law and distilled a coherent and philosophically justifiable statement of the bounds and details of the criminal sanction. Work on the Code itself was largely completed by 1962; the six volumes of updated and greatly expanded Commentaries that were published between 1980 and 1985 were limited to Parts I and II and therefore did not address the sentencing and corrections provisions. The current project is revisiting those provisions in light of the many changes in sentencing philosophy and practice that have taken place in the more than 40 years since these matters were first addressed in the Model Code. The project will take into account the contemporary controversy about the appropriate length of American criminal sentences and the present widespread dissatisfaction with the rules and procedures used to determine them.
On October 23, 2009, the ALI Council voted overwhelmingly, with some abstentions, to accept the resolution of the capital punishment matter as approved by the Institute’s membership at the 2009 Annual Meeting. The resolution adopted at the Annual Meeting and now accepted by the Council reads as follows: “For reasons stated in Part V of the Council’s report to the membership, the Institute withdraws Section 210.6 of the Model Penal Code in light of the current intractable institutional and structural obstacles to ensuring a minimally adequate system for administering capital punishment.”
Council’s report to the membership (April 15, 2009)
Having achieved the consensus of the membership at the Annual Meeting and now of the Council, this resolution is the official position of the Institute. Efforts will be made to communicate this position wherever the Model Penal Code is published or otherwise available and to the public generally.
This draft is comprised of: questions recommended for discussion on the following topics; Determinate versus Indeterminate Sentencing; Prison-Release Mechanisms Within a Generally Determinate Structure; Life Sentences; Needs and Risk Assessments of Offenders at Sentencing; Sentencing Juveniles Convicted in Adult Court; Post-Release Supervision Terms.
This draft is comprised of: questions recommended for discussion on the following topics; Determinate versus Indeterminate Sentencing; Prison-Release Mechanisms Within a Generally Determinate Structure; Life Sentences; Needs and Risk Assessments of Offenders at Sentencing; Sentencing Juveniles Convicted in Adult Court; Post-Release Supervision Terms
This draft is comprised of Part 1. General Provisions. Part III. Treatment and Correction. General Plan for Revision: Parts III and IV. Appendix : 1962 Model Penal Code , Parts III and IV.
This draft is comprised of Part 1. General Provisions. Part III. Treatment and Correction. General Plan for Revision: Parts III and IV. Appendix : 1962 Model Penal Code , Parts III and IV.
This draft was approved by the membership at the 2007 Annual Meeting, subject to the discussion at that meeting and to editorial prerogative.
Get More Details | Back to Top
This draft was approved by the membership at the 2007 Annual Meeting, subject to the discussion at that meeting and to editorial prerogative.
Get More Details | Back to Top
Part I. General Provisions; Article 1. Preliminary; Article 6A. Authority of the Sentencing Commission; Article 6B. Sentencing Guidelines; Article 7. Authority of the Court in Sentencing; Appendix A. Black-Letter Provisions Amended to Establish a System of Advisory Sentencing Guidelines
Part I. General Provisions; Article 1. Preliminary; Article 6A. Authority of the Sentencing Commission; Article 6B. Sentencing Guidelines; Article 7. Authority of the Court in Sentencing; Appendix A. Black-Letter Provisions Amended to Establish a System of Advisory Sentencing Guidelines
April 11, 2003