Criminal Sentencing in Tennessee: Purposes of the Reform Act
By way of introduction, I discuss in this entry the General Assembly’s express purposes in enacting the Criminal Sentencing Reform Act.
The Reform Act is the end result of comprehensive penal and sentencing reform legislation enacted in 1989 to address inconsistencies found in the penal code. Addressing these inconsistencies, the General Assembly set standards for crime classification and sentencing methodology. Principles underlying this unifying approach were also codified (or re-codified) in TCA 40-35-102 to ensure fairness and justice in sentencing procedures. Five principles are discussed below:
First, every defendant is to be punished by a sentence he or she justly deserves in relation to the seriousness of the offense. As will be seen, violent crimes like homicide and aggravated assault generally carry more severe consequences than other crimes. Furthermore, the seriousness of theft and vandalism offenses depends on the value of the property stolen or destroyed.
Second, defendants are assured fair and consistent treatment by eliminating unjustified disparities in sentencing and by providing a fair sense of predictability. In pursuit of this goal, the legislature examined the crimes in Tennessee and ranked them according to the perceived seriousness of each defense. The General Assembly created 5 classes of felonies (A through E) with each class carrying a defined prison and fine range. For example, the prison range for a Class E felony is one to 6 years, whereas the prison range for a Class A felony is 15 to 60 years. The General Assembly also created 3 separate ranges for misdemeanors.
Third, the goal of punishment is to prevent crime and promote respect for the law. Accordingly, sentences should provide an effective deterrent to those who are likely to violate the law, restrain defendants with lengthy criminal histories, encourage rehabilitation through alternative sentencing and correctional programs, and encouraging restitution to victims where appropriate.
Fourth, considerations as to race, gender, creed, religion, national origin or social status should not affect a convicted defendant’s sentence.
The last principle recognized by the General Assembly acknowledged the scarcity of prison resources—i.e., prison capacity and funds for building more. By recognizing these limits, according to the Code, “convicted felons committing the most severe offenses, possessing criminal histories evincing a clear disregard for the laws and morals of society, and evincing failure of past efforts at rehabilitation shall be given first priority regarding sentencing involving incarceration.”
As can be seen above, the legislature in enacting the sentencing laws sought to balance the individual defendant’s interest in fairness with society’s interest in justice. However, the legislature did not mistake fairness and justice as competing values resting on a fulcrum, but rather found solid ground where the crime fairly matched the punishment imposed.
Your criminal defense lawyer’s role in all of this is to make sure your side is fairly and justly represented. What this means in an adversarial system such as ours is that the defense attorney must zealously work against your accusers to lessen or avoid the punishments sought against you. If you need an experienced Knoxville criminal defense attorney who will work aggressively to protect your rights under the law, contact a member of our criminal defense team by dialing 866-853-2888.
Bookmark: 
