Determinate Sentencing, Impacts, and Recent Trends

When it comes to the criminal trial process, the last step those who are found guilty face before they are incarcerated is receiving their sentencing. There is more to a judge handing down a sentence than just giving the convicted person a time limit for how long he has to stay in incarcerated. When it comes to the different ranges of sentencing, there are five goals of contemporary criminal sentencing, the nature of structured sentencing must be understood and its positives explained, and determinate sentencing must be understood. Sentencing is not a cut and dry process. There is a lot that goes into it that many do not know about.

The United States is less the 5% of the world population but has almost 25% of the world’s prison population (Coates, 2015; Waldman, 2016). In the last 40 years, the number of American civilians imprisoned by the United States has increased 500%. (Mauer, 2011). However, this explosion in incarceration rates has not been evenly distributed throughout the American population (Waldman, 2016). While one in seventeen White men will be imprisoned in their lifetime, one in sixteen Latino men will face this fate and for Black men, the number is one in three (Mauer,2011). Neither the racial disparity in incarceration nor its scale was accidental (Coates, 2015). The mass incarceration of Black men in the United States was a direct result of the “War

The current policies focus at the consistent social change since the traditional punitive orientation of the criminal justice system turns out to be ineffective. As the crime rates keep growing, the public demands the introduction of more severe punishment for offenders, while prisons are overcrowded. Moreover, the growing crime rates among juveniles increase the public pressure on the criminal justice system as the public demands the introduction of severe punishment and imprisonment of juvenile offenders. However, the penitentiary system cannot imprison as much population as the public demands at the moment, while the imprisonment turns out to be ineffective in terms of the prevention of crimes and recidivism. In such a situation, the public is unprepared to the essential social change, when the imprisonment should be replaced by other, less strict and repressive forms of punishment. Policy makers should have

Vol. 82, no. 1. Winter 2002. p. 24. Online: EBSCOHost. Santiago Canyon College Library. August 6, 2017.

Numerous amounts of research has been conducted on the effectiveness of the three strikes sentencing policy, one of the more thorough ones to come along examined three strikes policy throughout the United States and came an interesting conclusion about the effectiveness of three strikes sentencing laws. The study found three strikes law to be ineffective in reducing crime in a variety of areas. The study found that rarely are they concerned with being caught for their crime, this was further attributed by the fact that a great deal

Determinate sentencing is becoming more popular in juvenile courts. It is a special statute that allows for the possibility of a juvenile serving a sentence beyond the age of 21. It specifically covers certain violent offenses and drug cases, like murder, capital murder, sexual assault, and indecency with a child. Aggravated controlled substances cases are also covered (TYC website). The alternative to determinate sentencing is blended sentencing, which allows judges to issue delinquent offenders both juvenile and adult dispositions. Depending on the behavior of the delinquent while serving out their juvenile sentence, a fail-safe postadjudication stage occurs to determine whether or not their adult sentence

Similar to the Sentencing Reform Act, the purpose of the United States Sentencing Commission is to prevent inequity of sentencing among federal judges. It’s role is to serve as a strict guideline for Judges to adhere and limits the discretion at which a Judge may alter the length of sentence. The goal of this commission is to hamper factors such as race, sex, socioeconomic status, etc to affect the length of sentence, and aims for the guideline to stand on a neutral ground.

This learner was not surprised that racial biases exist within our court system when it comes down to sentencing. So, are we saying the judges are racist? This learner hopes not, but she cannot help but wonder if they are just based on the number of African American that is housed in our jails/prisons. There just seems to be an overwhelming amount of us incarcerated verses Caucasians. It is also amazing that some of the sentencing time that judges past down for the same type of criminal act (e.g., burglary, auto theft, etc.) seems to be worst for African Americans more than there Caucasian counterparts. Especially if they are both first time offenders. Now, there could be other reasons for this, like pleading out their case verse going to trial. So, why is that? There could be many reasons, but for this discussion this learner will examine ways that we could eradicate some of the bias and discretion in the sentencing process.

2014). The official authorities in office that make legal decisions and judgments that are using indeterminate sentencing often employ statutes that identify clearly minimum and maximum terms (Siegel, L. 2014). Equally, they also permit judicial discretion to fix the actual sentence given within these guidelines (Siegel, L. 2014). Even though rehabilitation and parole have been under heavy attack by those who argue that criminals should be punished and not overprotected (Siegel, L. 2014). When said and done the indeterminate sentence is still the most widely used types of sentence the determinate sentencing continues to be favored in nearly one-third of the states (Siegel, L. and Bartollas, C.

The criminal justice system in the United States is not a single system, but rather a combined network of systems, reconfigured as one. This means that communication and transparency is even more important than it might be within a more one dimensional system. Mandatory minimum sentencing laws require binding prison terms for people convicted of certain federal and state crimes. These inflexible, “one-size-fits-all” sentencing laws may seem like a quick-fix solution for crime, but they undermine justice by preventing judges from fitting the punishment to the individual and the circumstances of their offenses. One question being considered within the legal community now is, while new crimes are being recognized as they are committed, should mandatory minimums really be “mandatory”, or should they be “suggested”, and serve more as a guideline, while the actual sentence is left to the discretion of the court? Not all crime is created equal and motive, or lack thereof, are factors that should play a role in the court’s determination of an appropriate sentence, should one in fact be imposed

The principle behind indeterminate sentences is the hope that prison will rehabilitate some offenders, and that different people respond very differently to punishment (Portman,

Indeterminate and Determinate sentencing are contentious issues impacting the manner in which justice is metered out. Supporters and critics challenge the effectiveness and fairness of either structure. Indeterminate sentencing sets minimum and maximum parameters on respective punishments. Parole boards meet during the sentence, determining individual parole eligibility and inmates deemed rehabilitated will be released on the lower end of their sentencing spectrum.

Sentencing models are plans or strategies developed for imposing punishment for crimes committed. During the 19th century these punishments were normally probation, fines and flat sentences. When someone was given a flat sentence, he or she had to serve the entire sentence without parole or early release. However, by the end of the 19th century the new models were developed. These new models include indeterminate, determinate, advisory/voluntary guidelines, presumptive and mandatory minimum sentencing (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2011).

There are rehabilitation facilities for the prisoners to ensure that the offenders do not get back to law breaking but will have acquired certain skills to help earn a living after the sentence period is over. The main reason for the establishment of the rehabilitation centers is to counter the increasing population in the prisons as people are being sentenced every day. The act under which the rehabilitation process is planning to reduce the population through the following means: first is community sentences where the offender will be made to do community works while staying at home; custody plus, which will involve short term of less than a year in prison then after which one works for the community while under rehabilitation; Custody Minus, where the prison sentence is suspended for a shorter period in case the offender has gone against the community sentence; intermittent custody, the sentences are served only during the weekends and there are restrictions on time spent in the community; and then the differed sentences which will depend on the fulfillment of the community based rules, (Robbin, 2004).

Over the past generation, the landscape of sentencing prisoners has changed dramatically. Over this same period, United States of America has made a number of modifications in one of the basis of American criminal justice policy, Prison Term. Prison Terms has taken the place of public flogging, death penalty and torture. Stastics has shows that many states has abolished death penalty. Today in order to deter the crime, Nowadays, only few states in the United States of America such as Texas, practices Death Penalty. Nevertheless, many fierce criminals are sentenced for a long prison term; in order to ensure public safety. In a response to fight against crime, there is an increase in the use of imprisonment. Conversely, many state legislatures have reduced prison term, discharging more prisoners (directly to the society) in order to maintain the prison management. A statistics of released prisoners over the decade/