S. 668 (98th): Sentencing Reform Act of 1984

Introduced:
Mar 03, 1983 (98th Congress, 1983–1984)
Status:
Died (Passed Senate) in a previous session of Congress

This bill was introduced in a previous session of Congress and was passed by the Senate on February 2, 1984 but was never passed by the House.

Introduced
Mar 03, 1983
Reported by Committee
Jul 26, 1983
Passed Senate
Feb 02, 1984
 
Sponsor
Edward “Ted” Kennedy
Senator from Massachusetts
Party
Democrat
Related Bills
H.J.Res. 648 (Related)
A joint resolution making continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1985, and for other ...

Signed by the President
Oct 12, 1984

 
Full Title

A bill to reform Federal criminal sentencing procedures.

Summary

No summaries available.

 
 
Primary Source

THOMAS.gov (The Library of Congress)

GovTrack gets most information from THOMAS, which is updated generally one day after events occur. Activity since the last update may not be reflected here. Data comes via the congress project.

Widget

Get a bill status widget for your website »

Citation

Click a format for a citation suggestion:

Notes

S. stands for Senate bill.

A bill must be passed by both the House and Senate in identical form and then be signed by the president to become law.

The bill’s title was written by its sponsor.

GovTrack’s Bill Summary

We don’t have a summary available yet.

Library of Congress Summary

The summary below was written by the Congressional Research Service, which is a nonpartisan division of the Library of Congress.


2/2/1984--Passed Senate amended.
(Measure passed Senate, amended, roll call #7 (85-3)) Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 - Sets forth a new sentencing structure applicable to a defendant who is found guilty of an offense under any Federal statute.
Permits an individual to be sentenced to a term of imprisonment or probation and a fine, and to receive additional sanctions, including:
(1) forfeiture for certain racketeering crimes and drug-related offenses;
(2) an order of notice to victims of crimes in cases involving fraud or deceptive practices; or
(3) an order of restitution in cases involving bodily injury or property damage.
Permits an organization to receive these penalties, with the exception of imprisonment.
Creates the United States Sentencing Commission. Specifies factors to be considered by a sentencing court, including the guidelines and policy statements issued by the United States Sentencing Commission. Requires the court to impose a sentence within the range set forth by the Commission, if one has been issued, unless aggravating or mitigating circumstances exist that were not adequately considered by the Commission in formulating the guidelines.
Requires the court to state in open court at the time of sentencing the reason for imposing a sentence at a point within the prescribed range, or the specific reason for imposing a sentence outside of such range.
Authorizes the imposition of a term of probation in certain circumstances.
Sets forth a fine schedule for the categories of offenses generally at higher levels than current law.
Includes higher maximums for organizational defendants.
Directs the court to consider the defendant's financial status in determining the amount of a fine and the method of payment.
Provides for the collection of criminal fines.
Sets maximum terms of imprisonment for five classes of felonies (A to E), three classes of misdemeanors (A to C), and an infraction (five day maximum).
Allows the court, in imposing a sentence of imprisonment for a felony or misdemeanor, to include a term of supervised release after imprisonment.
Eliminates the special sentencing provisions under current law for dangerous special offenders, youth offenders, young adult offenders, and drug addicts, but provides for these categories of offenders under the proposed sentencing guidelines.
Excludes capital punishment as an authorized penalty, but leaves unaffected the current death penalty and procedures for aircraft hijacking.
Eliminates the parole system.
Permits a defendant to petition for a sentence reduction upon a showing of extraordinary and compelling reasons.
Limits this motion for defendants who are sentenced to six or more years of imprisonment.
Allows the defendant or the government to file a notice of appeal in the district court for review of a final sentence.
Provides for congressional review of the operation of the sentencing system after receipt of a study by the General Accounting Office. Expresses the sense of the Senate that in the two years preceding the enactment of the sentencing guidelines, Federal judges in determining the particular sentence to be imposed should consider:
(1) the nature and circumstances of the offense and the history of the defendant;
(2) alternatives to imprisonment; and
(3) the appropriateness of imprisonment in cases in which the defendant has been convicted of a crime of violence or a serious offense.

House Republican Conference Summary

The summary below was written by the House Republican Conference, which is the caucus of Republicans in the House of Representatives.


No summary available.

House Democratic Caucus Summary

The House Democratic Caucus does not provide summaries of bills.

So, yes, we display the House Republican Conference’s summaries when available even if we do not have a Democratic summary available. That’s because we feel it is better to give you as much information as possible, even if we cannot provide every viewpoint.

We’ll be looking for a source of summaries from the other side in the meanwhile.

Use the comment space below for discussion of the merits of S. 668 (98th) with other GovTrack users.
Your comments are not read by Congressional staff.

comments powered by Disqus