Judges Allocation and Sentencing Guidelines

The prosecutor has more contact with everyone involved with the crime than maybe anyone else. He or she has contact with the person suspected of the crime, the victim, witnesses, and also works alongside the police to investigate and ensure the correct person is held accountable.

The diversity issue focused on in this paper will be racial disparity in sentencing. This paper will also focus on some of the reasons why racial disparity exists within sentencing. One of the research methods used in this paper will be case studies. In society today there are a diversity of citizens, of offenders, and leaders within in the court system. However, race still plays a big role in the Criminal Justice system especially during the sentencing portion. Although racial dynamics may have changed over time, race still exerts an undeniable presence in sentencing process. This ranges from disparate traffic stops due to racial profiling to imposition of the death penalty based on the race of

Even before watching the video, “Race on Trial” I believed that there was racial bias in the justice system and all this video did was reaffirm that. The fact that these two cases were so similar it is no surprise that the judge jumped to race as the only factor that separated their sentences. Even though there are federal sentencing guidelines put in place to prevent/reduce sentencing disparities it still occurs and many have done in depth research on it. In “The Relationship between Race, Ethnicity, and Sentencing Outcomes: A Meta-Analysis of Sentencing Research” they compared sentencing outcomes of African Americans to whites and saw that 66% of the sentencing outcomes that they studied showed that African Americans had a higher sentencing

The judge is the referee between the Crown and the defence who aim to prove their side of the story. The judge ensures both the prosecution and the defence meet the rules of evidence. Consequently, he decides whether the evidence provided

In this paper I will illustrate racial disparity in sentencing in the criminal justice system. The causes of racial disparity and the reasons it is on the rise, the research statistics, and the proposed solutions are discussed.

In modern-day America the issue of racial discrimination in the criminal justice system is controversial because there is substantial evidence confirming both individual and systemic biases. While there is reason to believe that there are discriminatory elements at every step of the judicial process, this treatment will investigate and attempt to elucidate such elements in two of the most critical judicial junctures, criminal apprehension and prosecution.

“Inter-judge sentencing disparity, in the view of sentencing reformers, offends important rule of law principles, erodes respect for the courts, and undermines the deterrent effect of criminal law.” (Scott, 4) The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, were created by the United States Sentencing Commission, were put in place to minimize unwarranted disparity among the sentences handed out by judges. These same guidelines that helped to decrease disparity among the sentences that same offenders received or did not receive, were made advisory in a serious of decisions from 2005 to 2007. (Scott, 1) Giving too much power to judges, through the advisory of the federal sentencing guidelines, has since created a surge in inter-judge disparities. Unwarranted

Similarly, there is need to examine whether race plays a role in determining if one is convicted or released. This is because an all-white bench convicted Hunt, who is of African American descent, of a crime he did not commit. Whether racial prejudice plays any role in our criminal and justice system needs critical examine since the law should be fair and equal before all. A non-discriminative judicial system will enhance public trust and eliminate cases of wrongful conviction.

From our class sessions, in order to hand down a ruling, a judge must first interpret the law before applying it to the case. Moreover, judges have other important responsibilities in the courtroom, such as admitting/denying evidence, instructing the jury, safeguarding the defendant 's rights and state 's interests in justice, upholding dignity, showing fairness, handing down sentences, discriminating/indiscriminating sentencing structures, even having to consider probation sanctions to impose on probationers. For instance, near the end of the proceeding, the judge instructed the jury about giving a verdict and the upcoming agenda for when they are to decide guilt or innocence. The judge played an active role in ensuring there is fairness on both sides of the prosecution and defense.

The criminal trial process is an interesting process that takes place in Courtrooms all across the United States and throughout the globe. This study intends to set out the various steps in the criminal trial process in the American justice system. A trial is described as a "legal forum for resolving individual disputes, and in the case of a criminal charge, it is a means for establishing whether an accused person is legally guilty of an offense. The trial process varies with respect to whether the matter at issue is civil in nature or criminal. In either case, a jury acts as a fact-finding body for the court in assessing information and evidence that is presented by the respective parties in a case. A judge presides over the court and addresses all the legal issues that arise during the trial. A judge also instructs the jury how to apply the facts to the laws that will govern in a given case." (3rd Judicial District, 2012)

Sentencing is essentially the final stage of the criminal justice process, aside from the appeals process. It is a dual decision-making process that consists of two significant stages. The first stage reflects the decision to grant incarceration or probation upon the accused, while the second stage involves determining the length of a sentence (Neubauer & Fradella, 2011). As this discussion focuses on the second stage of the sentencing process, it is important to understand key stakeholders involved at this decision-making point.

Discriminating in sentencing is an issue that needs to be fixed. A person could be discriminated against because of their age, sex, or race. It could work out in their favor or hurt them tremendously. The most common type of discrimination is due to race. It’s sad but I don’t think we will ever live in a world when people aren’t getting treated differently. There is a lot of data that proves people get different sentences for the same crimes. The reason they received a different sentence is because of their age, sex, or prestige. Money talks in the criminal justice system and this does help certain people. I have lost faith in our justice system, it is not uniform and depending on what judge you get or what lawyer you hired is a factor

Sentencing is a complicated, and sometimes extremely harsh set of rules. It has very deterrence, and retribution based set of rules for the most part. Which is indicative of the society we as americans live in. Through this paper i will explain each type of sentencing guideline. They are Intermediate, Determinate, Mandatory, Concurrent, and consecutive. Also we will talk about how in some states mandatory guidelines actually can lower the total prison population. But how in states that are not resource drive, incapacitation is on the rise. Finally i will convey my thoughts on sentencing. How it is a flawed and ,mostly broken system.

In the american court room there are several people involved. Some of the most important and lawful figures include: the judge, who is the main authority and the one responsible for justice. The prosecuting attorney, responsible for presenting the case against the defendant. The defense counsel, who is in

Distinction of roles between judges and juries is a further fundamental difference between the adversarial and inquisitorial systems. In an adversarial system, there is a division of work between a judge and jury. The role of the judge is to adjudicate the issue of law and to ensure that the trial proceeds comply with the procedural and substantial laws, while the role of the jury is to adjudicate the issue of facts as served by the opposing parties based on the law given by judges. Generally, a judge will not interfere in jury’s decision making, but this approach varies subject to matters being decided in the criminal or civil cases. In civil cases, a judge has a power to set aside a decision taken by jury if such decision was not made in accordance with the applicable law. However, in criminal cases a judge does not