Sentencing Models

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.

Judges and magistrates must consider a wide variety of factors when determining a sentence for an offender. Primarily, the sentence must coincide with the statutory guidelines e.g that set out in the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), and the judicial guidelines that set precedent for all judges and magistrates in the state. Within this legislation are the purposes for which a sentence may be imposed, types of penalties, minimum/maximum sentences and mandatory sentences.

Secondly, they should be addressed the needs of offenders and the deficits in their lives that contributed to their offending. And thirdly, sentences should not be severe, intrusive, or damaging to an offender’s later decarceration to live a righteous life than is minimally necessary to achieve valid purposes of the sentence he or she receives (Tonry 508). An addition to these are proportionality, which means that sentences should correspond in severity to the seriousness of the crimes which they are inflicted. Also, regularity, which signifies that sentences should be guided by official standards to make the process clear, procedures fair, and allow judges to be more accountable (Tonry 508). Moreover, the American Criminal Code must be taken into consideration. Two features must be altered if the sentencing is to become fair, effective, and just. Firstly, the harsh sentencing laws must be revoked, and secondly the limits, that matches the offense seriousness, must be put on the lawful sentences (Tonry 514). Moreover, Tonry mentioned about future changes that, “If adopted, they would greatly reduce the number of people in prison in future years, but their adoption would not significantly reduce the scale of American imprisonment in 2015 or in 2020. Doing that will require enactment of new laws authorizing reconsideration of sentences now being served (Tonry 523).

When a defendant is found guilty of a crime, it is the court’s role to decide upon a sentence that should be given to the offender. Typically, Magistrates and Judges are the main people that decide on sentences in the legal system. During the sentencing phase, there are specific rules by government that have to be followed when deciding on penalties and sentences. Every crime is given a maximum sentence, which is set based upon the type of crime committed. The four categories of sentencing are: custodial sentences, community sentences, fines and probation. There are also noncustodial sentences set in place as well. Furthermore, I will go into depth about the different sentencing that is used by the

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.

Preventing judges from taking relevant factors of a case into account when it comes to sentencing defies proportionality. Although two people can commit the same offence, the circumstances that lead to that offence can differ for an almost unlimited number of factors. It is up to judges take these factors into consideration when determining a proper sentence. It takes careful weighing to ensure all cases involving the same offences have similar sentencing and, at the same time, to treat two unique cases differently (8 Wright, pg 4). MMS remove this fundamental feature from our judicial system and allocate the power of sentencing to the Crown. This also gives the Crown leverage over the defence and the accused. Because punishments from MMS can

Merritt, N. Fain, Tuner, S. (2006). The author’s show that Oregon maintained an indeterminate criminal sentencing system through the 1980s (pp 5-6). Judges worked within broad penalty ranges set by the legislature to determine appropriate sentences, setting minimum and maximum terms for each defendant on an individual basis, with a parole board with responsible for reviewing the progress of each offender and determining whether, and when, rehabilitation was sufficient to merit release

Mandatory penalties have not always been a central feature of the U.S. criminal justice system (Subramanian, Ram and Delaney R, 2014). Until the 1980s, sentencing in the United

Another example is if two people commit a crime and one person goes to prison while the other only has to do community service is not fair at all. Both people committed the crime by their free will because they chose to commit the crime for their pleasure. Parole uses two strategies to support classicalism. The two strategies that support classicism are indeterminate and determinate sentencing. Indeterminate sentencing the judge enforces a prison term that has both a minimum and maximum sentence. The parole board gets to decide on their release date based on how good the prisoners have been. In this type of strategy, folks who commit the same type of crime might get different sentences. Since indeterminate sentencing was dislike, determinate sentencing was adopted. What is determinate sentencing? Determinate sentencing is a sentence having a specific number of years expected to be in prison. Determinate sentencing promotes good time; ranging 15-50 percent off the sentence to encourage prison discipline. Meaning that if an offender is good while in prison her or she will get out of prison earlier than their original sentencing. There are different models for

(Zhang, Y., Zhang, L., Vaughn, M. (2009). Determinate prison sentences or mandatory-minimum sentencing seems like it would discourage criminals from committing crimes because one would think that with harsher sentences would be likely to deter criminals from breaking the law. In the 1970s, indeterminate sentencing was used frequently, in most states judges and parole boards used wide discretion in sentencing offenders. (Zhang, Y., Zhang, L., Vaughn, M. (2009). As it stands, the number of prisoners in the US in 2017 is ten times as much when compared to pre -1971, while the overall population rates have increased only by a third. Half of these prisoners (51%) are jailed for non-violent offenses (World Prison Brief, 2015). The existing number of prisons is not enough to hold and adequately maintain its numerous populations. Many of them are

Determinate sentences are those in which the offender is given a fixed term that might be reduced based on good behavior or earned time. There is usually underlying expectations on the amount of punishment and a set release date with no review by

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

The advantage of the indeterminate sentenced is the fact that it has although the crimes may be similar to each other it is never the same sentenced and gives the person who has committed the crime an opportunity not to have to serve the full sentence. For an example if a person robs a school bus and it carries a undetermined sentence of two to five years then and it is there first time robbing the bank although it carries a maximum sentence of five years he has the opportunity to only serve the minimum of the two years. It also protects the offender against “the abuse of discretion caused concerns about individual rights, because prosecutors, judges, and parole boards were immune from review and some practiced arbitrary uses of discretion” (p.

What I think should be done is an analyzation of previous sentences for a specific crime should be averaged up, and the number of years that is represented as the mean should be what every person should

The promise of early release is a powerful incentive for the inmates to behave in compliance with the prison rules and regulations (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2015). If a prisoner is aware that his behavior in prison will determine their early release then logically, the prisoner will ensure to be on model behavior for that end result (Larkin Jr, 2013). This means that the prison administration can reliably use the promise of parole or the threat of no parole to have the inmates behaving well. Of course, this leads to the danger of the prisoners learning to act as instructed but having never reformed. With the knowledge that they could be released even the unrepentant prisoner will act repentant to secure his or her release after which they may