Three strikes and you're in: A streams and windows model of incremental policy change

Journal of Criminal Justice

Volumn 24, Issue 1, 1996, Pages 57-70

  Saint Germain, Michelle A ^a   Calamia, Robert A ^b  

^a CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0030497234     PISSN: 00472352     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/0047-2352(95)00052-6     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Adams, M. A. (1994). The federal sentencing guidelines as legal process jurisprudence. American Criminal Law Review 31(2):259-88.
2. Alschuler, A. W. (1978). Sentencing reform and prosecutorial power: A critique of recent proposals for "fixed" and "presumptive" sentencing. In Determinate sentencing: Reform or regression?, National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice. Washington, DC: Proceedings of the Special Conference on Determinate Sentencing, June 2-3, 1977.
3. Alschuler, A. W., and Schulhofer, S. J. (1989). Judicial impressions of the sentencing guidelines. Federal Sentencing Reporter 2(3):94.
4. American Friends Service Committee. (1971). Struggle for justice: A report on crime and punishment in America. New York: Hill and Wang.
5. Anderson, J. E. (1994). Public policy-making: An introduction. 2nd ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin
6. Austin, J., and Krisberg, B. (1985). Incarceration in the United States: The extent and future of the problem. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 478:15-30.
7. Bachrach, P., and Baratz, M. S. (1970). Power and poverty. New York: Oxford University Press.
8. Berke, R. L. (1994). G.O.P. sees crime as a major issue. New York Times, 22 January, 9.
9. Brown, J. B. (1992). The sentencing guidelines are reducing disparity. American Criminal Law Review 29(3): 875-88.
10. Calamia, J. R. (1994). Interview by Robert Calamia. El Paso, Texas, 23 October.
11. California judge refuses to apply a tough new sentencing law. (1994). New York Times, 20 July, A9.
12. Feinberg, K. R. (1991). The federal guidelines and the underlying purposes of sentencing. Federal Sentencing Reporter 3(6):326.
13. Fisher, I. (1994). Why "three-strike" sentencing is a solid hit this season. New York Times, 25 January, B1.
14. Fogel, D., and Hudson, J., eds. (1981). Justice as fairness: Perspectives on the justice model. New York: Anderson Publishing.
15. Ford Foundation. (1967). And justice for all. New York: Ford Foundation.
16. Frankel, M. E. (1972). Criminal sentences: Law without order. New York: Hill and Wang.
17. Freed, D. J. (1992). Federal sentencing in the wake of guidelines: Unacceptable limits on the discretion of sentencers. Yale Law Journal 101(8):1681-1754.
18. Frost, M. L. (1982). Sentencing reform: Experiments in reducing disparity. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
19. Goodstein, L., and Hepburn, J. (1985). Determinate sentencing and imprisonment: A failure of reform. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing.
20. Gottfredson, M. R., and Gottfredson, D. M. (1980). Decision-Making in criminal justice. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
21. Gottfredson, M. R., and Wilkins, L. (1978). Study for parole decision policies. New York: Ford Foundation.
22. Gray, J. (1994). New Jersey senate approves bill to jail three-time criminals for life. New York Times, 13 May, A1.
23. Greenberg, D. F., and Humphries, D. (1980). The cooptation of fixed sentencing reform. Crime and Delinquency 26(2):206-25.
24. Griset, P. L. (1991). Determinate sentencing: The promise and the reality of retributive justice. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
25. Hayes, M. T. (1992). Incrementalism and public policy. White Plains, NY: Longman Publishing.
26. Heaney, G. W. (1991). The realities of guidelines sentencing: No end to disparity. American Criminal Law Review 28(2):161-232.
27. Heaney, G. W. (1992). Revisiting disparity: Debating guidelines sentencing. American Criminal Law Review 29(3):771-94.
28. Holmes, S. A. (1994). Ranks of inmates reach one million in a two-decade rise. New York Times, 28 October, A1.
29. Hussey, F. A., and Kramer, J. H. (1978). Issues in the study of criminal code revision: An analysis of reform in Maine and California. In Determinate sentencing: Reform or regression?, National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice. Washington, DC: Proceedings of the Special Conference on Determinate Sentencing, June 2-3, 1977.
30. Kaminer, W. (1994). Federal offense. Atlantic Monthly 273(6):102-14.
31. Kennedy, E. M. (1992). Foreword: Federal sentencing guidelines symposium. American Criminal Law Review 29(3):ix-xi.
32. Kingdon, J. W. (1984). Agendas, alternatives, and public policies. New York: Harper Collins.
33. Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
34. Levine, C. H. (1985). Where policy comes from: Ideas, innovations, and agenda choices. Public Administration Review 45:255-58.
35. McGarrell, E. F. (1993a). The implementation of federally funded multijurisdictional drug task forces: Organizational structure and interagency relationships. Journal of Criminal Justice 21:231-44.
36. McGarrell, E. F. (1993b). Trends in racial disproportionality in juvenile court processing: 1985-1989. Crime and Delinquency 39:29-48.
37. Meierhoefer, B. S. (1991). Individualized and systemic justice in the federal sentencing process. American Criminal Law Review 29(3):889-98.
38. Messinger, S. L., and Johnson, P. E. (1978). California's determinate sentencing statute: History and issues. In Determinate sentencing: Reform or regression?, National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice. Washington, DC: Proceedings of the Special Conference on Determinate Sentencing, June 2-3, 1977.
39. Morris, N. (1978). Conceptual overview and commentary on the movement toward determinacy. In Determinate ssentencing: Reform or regression ?, National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice. Washington, DC: Proceedings of the Special Conference on Determinate Sentencing, June 2-3, 1977.
40. Motley, C. B. (1973). "Law and order" and the criminal justice system. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 64(3):259-69.
41. Mucciaroni, G. (1992). The garbage can model and the study of policy making: A critique. Polity 23(3):459-82.
42. Nagel, I. H. (1990). Structuring sentencing discretion: The new federal sentencing guidelines. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 80(4):883-943.
43. National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. (1978a). Classification for parole decision policy. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
44. National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, U.S. Department of Justice, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration. (1978b). Determinate sentencing: Reform or regression? Proceedings of the Special Conference on Determinate Sentencing, June 2-3, 1977. Washington, DC.
45. Palumbo, D. J., ed. (1987). The politics of program evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
46. Reibstein, L., and Carrol, G. (1994). Back to the chain gang. Newsweek, 17 October, 124(16):87-90.
47. Reske, H. J. (1994). Throwing away the key. ABA Journal 80:66-68.
48. Sabatier, P. A. ( 1991 ). Toward better theories of the policy process. American Political Science and Politics 24(2):147-56.
49. Schulhofer, S. J., and Nagel, I. H. (1989). Negotiated pleas under the federal sentencing guidelines: The first fifteen months. American Criminal Law Review 27:231-88.
50. Spillane, M. (1994). String 'em up. The Nation, 21 November, 599.
51. Tonry, M. (1989). Are the U.S. sentencing guidelines working well? Federal Sentencing Reporter 2(4):122-26.
52. Ulemen, G. F. (1992). Federal sentencing guidelines: A cure worse than the disease. American Criminal Law Review 29(3):899-906.
53. U.S. House of Representatives. (1994). Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
54. U.S. Sentencing Commission. (1991). Special report to Congress: Mandatory minimum penalties in the federal criminal justice system. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
55. U.S. Sentencing Commission. (1993a). Annual report. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
56. U.S. Sentencing Commission. (1993b). Guidelines Manual, Appendix C: Amendments to the Sentencing Guidelines Manual. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
57. von Hirsch, A. (1985). Past or future crimes: Deservedness and dangerousness in the sentencing of criminals. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
58. Weigel, S. A. (1988). The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984: A practical appraisal. UCLA Law Review 36(1):83-105.