Opinion ID: 2087919
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Sentencing Framework

Text: [¶ 10] Criminal sentencing is one of the most difficult responsibilities of a judge. Within certain parameters, the judge is given the discretion to fashion an individual sentence. That discretion must be exercised in a way that meets often competing goals. [1] For example, the court must both individualize the sentence to the particular defendant, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1151(6) (1983), and must at the same time eliminate inequalities in sentences that are not related to legitimate criminological goals, 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1151(5) (1983). In other words, while addressing the many goals of sentencing, the court must endeavor to create consistency among sentences for similar crimes and must, at the same time, tailor the sentence to the individual defendant. [2] [¶ 11] In order to place all of the differing considerations into a manageable framework, the sentencing court must engage in the analysis first announced in Hewey, 622 A.2d at 1151, and now codified at 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1252-C. This analysis, commonly referred to as a Hewey Analysis, requires the court to undertake three steps. First, the court must determine a basic sentence based solely on the nature and seriousness of the offense. [3] Next, the court must examine the crime and all relevant mitigating and aggravating factors in order to establish an individualized maximum sentence. Finally, the court must set a final sentence, determining how much of the sentence, if any, should be suspended and what circumstances and conditions of probation, if any, should be ordered. See State v. Bolduc, 638 A.2d 725, 727 (Me.1994). [¶ 12] When, as here, the defendant has been convicted of one or more Class A crimes, the court must engage in an additional preliminary step to determine whether the crime falls within the higher tier of Class A sentences. State v. MacDonald, 1998 ME 212, ¶ 15, 718 A.2d 195, 199; see also 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1251(2)(A) (1983). In this context, [t]he court may consider a serious criminal history of the defendant and impose a maximum period of incarceration in excess of 20 years based on either the nature and seriousness of the crime alone or on the nature and seriousness of the crime coupled with the serious criminal history of the defendant. 17-A M.R.S.A. § 1252(2)(A) (Supp.1999). Accordingly, depending on the nature of the crime and the defendant's criminal history, the highest sentence available for a Class A crime may be either 20 years or 40 years.