More handpicked essays just for you.
History of corrections essay
Advantages and disadvantages of Determinate and indeterminate sentencing
Advantages and disadvantages of Determinate and indeterminate sentencing
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
When it comes to determinate and indeterminate sentencing, the judge is the person who decides what model will be implemented. Determinate sentences were most commonly used in the beginning of our nation’s history. A determinate sentence is a fixed length sentence. A “tough on crime” system (Portman, n.d.). Indeterminate sentencing is more commonly used today and first appeared in the late nineteenth century. Indeterminate sentencing focused on rehabilitation of the offender.
Indeterminate is not only most preferred by judges, but additionally by prison officials. By having an offender with indeterminate sentencing the offender has the possibility of an early release due to good behavior and would have to go in front of a parole board. This
Specific deterrence applies specifically to individual offenders who have been previously sentenced. The severity of the punishment for an offence should keep the specific one individual from reoffending (Siegel et al, 2013, p.83). This focuses on individuals.
Mandatory sentencing refers to the practice of parliament setting a fixed penalty for the commission of a criminal offence. Mandatory sentencing was mainly introduced in Australia to: prevent crime, to incapacitate the offenders, to deter offenders so they don’t offend again, to create a stronger retribution and to eliminate inconsistency. There is a firm belief that the imposition of Mandatory sentencing for an offence will have a deterrent effect on the individual and will send a forcible message to the offenders. Those in favour argue that it will bring consistency in sentencing and conciliate public concern about crime and punishment.
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 should be suspended or invoked (Belshaw et al, 2011).
The criminal justice system has been in place the United States for centuries. The system has endured many changes throughout the ages. The need for a checks and balances system has been a priority for just as long. Federal sentencing guidelines were created to help create equal punishments among offenders. Judges are given the power of sentencing and they are not immune to opinions, bias, and feelings. These guidelines are set in place to allow the judge to keep their power but keep them within a control group of equality. Although there are a lot of pros to sentencing guidelines there are also a lot of cons. Research has shown that sentencing guidelines have allowed the power to shift from judges to prosecutors and led to sentencing disparity based on sex, race, and social class.
Since the 1980s, the federal prison population of the US has grown from 24,640 to 214,149 (Population Statistics 1). This figure may appear miniscule given the fact that there are over 300 million people residing within the United States. However, this is just one figure of many; currently, the United States holds the largest prison population total out of any country at 2,217,000 (Prison Population Total 1). This major increase in incarceration is not the product of a higher crime rate, but due to the creation of sentencing guidelines that followed the enactment of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. These guidelines require that certain federal and state crimes result in a set minimum of years in prison. The minimum sentencing guidelines
The aims of sentencing include punishment, deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection. Punishment is used to punish the offender for their wrong conduct to an extent and in a way that is just in all circumstances and is intended to show public abhorrence from the offence. An example of a sentencing option that may be used to punish an offender includes imprisonment. A recent sentence imposed in the Tasmanian Supreme Court aimed at punishing an offender is the case of Michael Robert Keeling v State of Tasmania in which the judge needed to balance the need to punish the offender and the need to deter him and others from such conduct while keeping the best interests of the community in mind. Deterrent sentences are aimed at deterring not only the offender from further offences but also potential offenders. Specific deterrence is concerned with punishing an offender in the expectation they will not offend again whereas general deterrence is related to the possibility that people in general will be deterred from committing crime by the threat of punishment. An example of ...
Mandatory sentencing is not anything new. It began in the 1970s. The main purpose for mandatory sentencing was to try to get rid of the drug lords and to eliminate most of the nation’s street drug selling. It was to impose that the same crime would have the same sentence all over the nation. Some of the negatives that rose from mandatory sentencing were nonviolent drug offenders and first time offenders who were receiving harsh sentences. Inmate populations and correction costs increased and pushed states to build more prisons. Judges were overloaded with these cases, and lengthy prison terms were mandated to these young offenders. Mandatory sentencing is an interesting topic in which I would like to discuss my opinions in going against mandatory sentencing. I will show the reasons for this topic, as well as give you my personal brief on which I support.
Prior to the implementation of sentencing guidelines, judges had total judicial discretion in determining sentence lengths leading to a wide fluctuation of sentences to offenders convicted of similar crimes due to the judge considering all information about the offender when sentencing.
More are sentencing options are great because just like every person is different, so is the crime. Prison may not always be the most effective response for people, so If courts have options other than incarceration, “they can better tailor a cost-effective sentence that fits the offender and the crime, protects the public, and provides rehabilitation” (FAMM, 2011). Findings have also proven that alternative saves taxpayers money. “It costs over $28,000 to keep one person in federal prison for one year1 (some states’ prison costs are much higher). Alternatives to incarceration are cheaper, help prevent prison and jail overcrowding, and save taxpayers millions” (FAMM, 2011, para. 3). Lastly, alternatives protect the public by reducing crime. There is a 40% chance that all people leaving prison will go back within three years of their release (FAMM, 2011). “Alternatives to prison such as drug and mental health courts are proven to confront the underlying causes of crime (i.e., drug addiction and mental illness) and help prevent offenders from committing new crimes” (FAMM, 2011, para.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Noncustodial Sentences Non-Custodial Sentences A non custodial order is a sentence given to an offender who has committed a less serious crime. The offender is given community orders rather than imprisonment. If the offender breaks any of the below orders then they will be re-sentenced and this is likely to result in them being given a heavier order or even a prison sentence. The types of non custodial orders available are; * Community rehabilitation order (previously called 'probation order' and unhelpfully changed to this inferior new name) * Community punishment order (previously called 'community service order' - ambiguous but at least not absurd) * Community Punishment and Rehabilitation Order (previously the obtuse
Indeterminate sentencing involves the judge handing down the sentence, specifying what the maximum and the minimum sentence is. However, the actual length of time served is determined by the parole board. Determinate sentencing involves prisoners being released early for good behavior. In other words, these inmates are given credits for good behavior or for participation in projects, experiments or educational programs (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2011). The credits, in turn, reduce the sentencing.
One sentence that is handed down is the indeterminate sentence. This sentence permits early release from a correctional institution after the offender has served a required minimum portion of his or her sentence ("Indeterminate vs Determinate Prison Sentences Explained | Criminal Law", n.d.). This may be a good type of sentence for someone that may be a first time offender or maybe one that the judge may feel has a good chance at being rehabilitated. One problem with...
By law, minimum sentencing is set for certain crimes for which judges can’t lower under any circumstances. It requires that offenders serve a predetermined sentence for certain crimes. Since the 18 century, congress has been using minimum sentencing. The Constitution authorized Congress to establish criminal offenses and to set the punishments for offences such as murder, treason and to address immediate problems and needs. Congress enacted the first mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment as a response to strained relationships between the United States and France. “In preparation for a possible war with France, Congress passed the Sedition Act of 1798, which among other provisions created a new offense of opposing
It is these guidelines and rules that a judge follows when deciding what sentence that the defendant will be given when they are found guilty. The United States Sentencing Commission makes up the sentencing guidelines. “The sentencing guidelines help the judges to resolve their confusion. Sentencing guidelines are designed to ensure the consistency of sentencing in United States courts” (USLegal, 2014).