Abstract
Grievances and restlessness among convicted prisoners led to legislation–in 1943 in Massachusetts, in 1957 in Connecticut–establishing sentence review boards composed of three judges of the trial courts of first instance. The authors explore in these two jurisdictions how often and under what circumstances sentences are appealed and modified and what effect, if any, these modifications have on the sentencing practice in the trial courts. They also appraise the value of the Connecticut requirement that the review board state the reasons for its decisions. The authors explore the function of the review boards in the broader context of the need for reducing sentence disparity.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
