S.B. 222

VETOES

(I) WHETHER DESCRIPTIVE SENTENCING GUIDELINES SHOULD BE
RETAINED BY THE STATE AS A SENTENCING STRUCTURE EITHER IN THEIR
CURRENT FORM OR IN A MODIFIED FORM;

(II) WHETHER THE STATE SHOULD ADOPT GUIDED DISCRETION
SENTENCING GUIDELINES AND, IF SO, WHAT TYPE OF GUIDED DISCRETION
SENTENCING GUIDELINES SHOULD BE ADOPTED;

(III) WHETHER THE STATE SHOULD RETAIN PAROLE AS A
CORRECTIONAL OPTION OR ELIMINATE PAROLE FOR ALL INMATES OR ANY
PARTICULAR CATEGORY OF INMATES;

(IV) WHETHER THE STATE SHOULD INCREASE THE MINIMUM
PORTION OF A SENTENCE THAT MUST BE SERVED BY ALL INMATES OR ANY
PARTICULAR CATEGORY OF INMATES BEFORE BECOMING ELIGIBLE FOR PAROLE;

(V) WHETHER THE STATE SHOULD ELIMINATE GOOD TIME
CREDITS OR OTHERWISE ALTER THE MANNER IN WHICH AN INMATE MAY OBTAIN
RELEASE ON MANDATORY SUPERVISION;

(VI) WHETHER THE STATE NEEDS TO TAKE ACTION TO ENSURE
THAT THERE IS A COORDINATED SYSTEM OF INTERMEDIATE PUNISHMENTS
CORRECTIONAL OPTIONS PROGRAMS AT THE STATE AND COUNTY LEVELS AND, IF SO,
WHAT ACTION SHOULD BE TAKEN; AND

(VII) ANY OTHER MATTER RELATING TO STATE AND LOCAL LAWS
AND POLICIES GOVERNING SENTENCING, PAROLE, MANDATORY SUPERVISION, AND
INTERMEDIATE PUNISHMENTS CORRECTIONAL OPTIONS PROGRAMS.

(2) THE SENTENCING AND CORRECTIONAL PROCESS SHALL PURSUE THE
FOLLOWING OBJECTIVES:

(I) PROMOTE SENTENCING THAT MORE ACCURATELY REFLECTS THE
TIME THAT AN OFFENDER WILL ACTUALLY BE INCARCERATED;

(II)    CONCENTRATE PRISON CAPACITY ON THE INCARCERATION OF
VIOLENT AND CAREER OFFENDERS;

(III)   REDUCE UNWARRANTED DISPARITY IN SENTENCES FOR
OFFENDERS WHO HAVE COMMITTED SIMILAR OFFENSES AND HAVE SIMILAR CRIMINAL
HISTORIES;

(IV)   PRESERVE MEANINGFUL JUDICIAL DISCRETION IN THE
IMPOSITION OF SENTENCES AND SUFFICIENT FLEXIBILITY TO PERMIT INDIVIDUALIZED
SENTENCES; AND

(V) ENSURE THAT SENTENCING JUDGES IN EVERY JURISDICTION IN
THE STATE ARE ABLE TO IMPOSE THE MOST APPROPRIATE CRIMINAL PENALTIES,
INCLUDING CORRECTIONAL OPTIONS PROGRAMS FOR APPROPRIATE NONVIOLENT
OFFENDERS.

- 3946 -