Sentencing guidelines were an exclusively American enterprise until recently. Since 2004, however, other countries have joined in. Contrasting approaches are exemplified by systems developed by the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines Commission and the Sentencing Council of England and Wales. Minnesota’s guidelines are set out in grids that categorize cases by offense and criminal history. Each cell sets out ranges of sentences that are presumed to be appropriate. The English guidelines are step-by-step decision trees, one for each principal offense category. Each jurisdiction created an approach that fits its sentencing environment. The Minnesota grids are more restrictive and generate high levels of judicial conformity and consistency. The English guidelines allow greater discretion, possibly at the cost of consistency. However, the English approach provides ampler guidance on use of different dispositions, sentencing of multiple crimes, appropriate reductions to reflect guilty pleas, and other subjects. Neither the Minnesota Commission nor the English Council has been particularly self-critical. Minnesota’s main grid has changed little since 1980. England’s guidelines have evolved considerably, but the council has ignored calls to play a more active role in controlling the use of custody and hence the size of the prison population.

中文翻译：

---

明尼苏达州，英格兰和威尔士的判刑指南的演变

直到最近，判刑准则仍是美国唯一的企业。但是，自2004年以来，其他国家也加入了。明尼苏达州判刑指南委员会和英格兰和威尔士判刑委员会开发的系统就是与此形成鲜明对比的方法。明尼苏达州的准则在网格中列出，该网格按犯罪和犯罪历史对案件进行分类。每个单元格列出了被认为适当的句子范围。英文指南是循序渐进的决策树，每个主要犯罪类别一棵。每个管辖区都创建了适合其量刑环境的方法。明尼苏达州的网格更加严格，并产生高水平的司法合规性和一致性。英文指南允许更大的自由裁量权，可能会以保持一致性为代价。然而，英国的方法为使用不同性格的人，对多种罪行的量刑，适当减少以体现认罪等其他方面提供了指导。明尼苏达州委员会和英国文化协会都没有特别自我批评。自1980年以来，明尼苏达州的主要电网变化不大。英格兰的指导方针已发生了很大变化，但该委员会却无视要求在控制羁押用途和监狱人数方面发挥更加积极作用的呼吁。