Criminal Justice System In The 18th Century

639 Words2 Pages

In colonial times, before the thought of American independence, the juries that handled all of the criminal cases were very important and considered tangible sentencers with a great amount of power. Many of the crimes committed were capital offenses such as murder. The result had two options, guilty and death or not guilty and freedom. There were certain situations that had set factors to determine the severity of the punishment or punishments that involved terms of many years. This was set in place because penitentiaries were not common until the eighteenth century. Jurors understood the basics of the criminal justice system and the impact of a guilty verdict on the defendant because of the relativity and straightforwardness of the criminal law and its penalty …show more content…

Soon after federal criminal law was in the forefront even though most prosecutions were still state based. With more access to education and a more professional realm of judges and lawyers the power of the jury declined. The jury also became more diverse. This was soon to be true come the twentieth century when the system focused on indeterminate sentencing and rehabilitation. Judges had a major role of sentencing. It was all left in their hands and the jury focused on liability. Congress took a back seat and only intervened when they wanted to increase the maximum penalty to certain crimes when it came to the demand of the public. The discretion of sentencing that is held by the judges is determined by the seriousness of the crimes. However, whatever the judge decides must remain within the statutory range. Judges and prosecutors have the most power within the court. There was little to no appellate review of sentencing. The rehabilitation model shaped the sentencing law; which is a penal philosophy that reinforced the role of the judge and limited the role of congress and the public (Gertner,

Open Document