Sentencing and Comparative Law Theory

Crime, Procedure and Evidence in a Comparative and International Context: Essays in Honour of Professor Mirjan Damaška

Volumn , Issue , 2008, Pages 351-370

  Frase, Richard S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA LAW SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85194730152     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (23)

1. M Tonry, ‘Determinants of Penal Policies’ (2007) 36 Crime & Justice 1.
2. M Cavadino and J Dignan, Penal Systems: A Comparative Perspective (London, Sage Publications, 2006) (also includes Japan)
3. C Tata and N Hutton, Sentencing and Society: International Perspectives (Aldershot, Ashgate Publishing Ltd, 2002) (includes China)
4. DvZS Smit and F Dünkel, Imprisonment Today and Tomorrow 2nd edn (The Hague, Kluwer, 2001)
5. MR Damaška, Models of Criminal Procedure (Zagreb, Zagreb Law School, 2001) 477-78
6. RS Frase, ‘Comparative Criminal Justice Policy, in Theory and in Practice’ (1998) in Comparative Criminal Justice Systems: From Diversity to Rapprochement, 17 Nouvelles Etudes Pénales 112.
7. MR Damaška, The Faces of Justice and State Authority: A Comparative Approach to the Legal Process (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1986)
8. KR Reitz, ‘The Disassembly and Reassembly of US Sentencing Practices’ in Tonry and Frase, above n 1.
9. RS Frase, ‘The Apprendi-Blakely Cases: Sentencing Reform Counter-Revolution?’ (2007) 6 Criminology & Public Policy 403.
10. RS Frase, ‘Historical and Comparative Perspectives on the Exceptional Severity of Sentencing in the United States’ (2004) 36 George Washington International Law Review 237
11. JQ Whitman, Harsh Justice: Criminal Punishment and the Widening Divide Between America and Europe (New York, OUP, 2003).
12. MD Damaška, Evidence Law Adrift (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1997) 134-42, suggests another development that might explain determinate sentencing reforms in the US by asserting that the dominant purpose of Anglo-American justice systems has shifted toward a more activist, policy-implementation stance.
13. RS Frase, ‘France’ in C Bradley (ed), Criminal Procedure: A Worldwide Study 2nd edn (Durham, Carolina Academic Press, 2007);
14. T Weigend, ‘Germany’ in C Bradley, above.
15. A Bottoms, ‘The Philosophy and Politics of Punishment and Sentencing’ in CMV Clarkson and R Morgan (eds), The Politics of Sentencing Reform (Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1995).
16. D Garland, The Culture of Control: Crime and Social Order in Contemporary Society (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2001).
17. JQ Whitman, Harsh Justice: Criminal Punishment and the Widening Divide Between America and Europe (New York, OUP, 2003) 5-6.
18. RS Frase, ‘International Perspectives on Sentencing Policy and Research’ in Tonry and Frase, above n 1, 283-84.
19. RS Frase, ‘Comparative Criminal Justice as a Guide to American Law Reform: How Do the French Do It, How Can We Find Out, and Why Should We Care?’ (1990) 78 California Law Review 539, 648
20. M Tonry, Thinking About Crime: Sense and Sensibility in American Penal Culture (Oxford, OUP, 2004) 22.
21. T Lappi-Seppala, ‘Penal Policy in Scandinavia’ (2007) 36 Crime & Justice 222 (Finland)
22. T Weigend, ‘Sentencing and Punishment in Germany’ in Tonry and Frase, above n 1, 190 (Germany).
23. S Roché, ‘Criminal Justice Policy in France: Illusions of Severity’ (2007) 36 Crime & Justice 487 (France).