Judicial discretion has been prevalent in the first half of the last three decades, but has been regulated by the legislature since 1984. Discretion by definition is the authorization to decide as one sees fit, absolutely or within limits ( Ntanda, 1999). Indeterminate sentencing has traditionally given judges considerable discretion in deciding criminal sentencing. “While such discretion theoretically allows judges to tailor sentences to the circumstances of individual crimes and criminals, thus achieving a kind of ex post fairness, it also allows for variations in sentences that may not be justified by the observable facts of the case, instead reflecting the preferences of the judge” (Miceli, 2008, p. 207). The extent of a defendant's punishment is generally based on the severity of the crime and the defendant's criminal history, dictated by sentencing guidelines. Judges, with a few exceptions, are required to choose a sentence from the above-mentioned range; however, because judges retain some discretion, it is the legislature that controls most sentencing as it sets the guidelines for judges to use. In 1984, the Comprehensive Crime Control Act was passed by Congress, thus creating the United States Sentencing Commission. . The primary goal of the United States Sentencing Commission was to reform criminal procedures in this country (Miceli, 2008). Criminal sentencing procedures have required reform as significant disparities exist between defendants with similar criminal histories. The above statement would suggest that prior to the reform, judicially imposed sentences varied among defendants in ways Congress deemed unjust. “Congress has documents for those convicted and judges take these factors into account when deciding on sentencing. Judges often took into consideration the age and poor health of an older offender and in some cases led to a lenient attitude when deciding on the judge's sentence. Works Cited Miceli, T. J. (2008). GUIDELINES ON CRIMINAL SENTENCES AND JUDICIAL DISCRETION. Contemporary Economic Policy, 26(2), 207-215. Mueller-Johnson, K., & Dhami, M. K. (2010). Effects of offenders' age and health on sentencing decisions. The Journal of Social Psychology, 150(1), 77-97.Ntanda, D. D. (1999). Minimum sentences and their effect on judicial discretion. Crime, Law and Social Change, 31(4), 363-384. United States, S.C. (2012). Report to Congress: Mandatory Minimum Sentences in the Federal Criminal Justice System. Federal sentencing reporter, 24(3), 185-192.