The 3 Strike Law is a law that applies to offender that have a history of being convicted of two or more violent crimes, and have moved on to committing another serious offense. Consequently, their prison sentence is increased in comparison to their previous sentences resulting in receiving a punishment to life in prison at their third offense. However, in 1994 the state of California enacted the law were criminals could be incarcerated when committing a non-violent crime for the third time, as long as they had a history of ever committing a serious or violent felony, the 3 Strike Law will still apply to them. The 3 strike Law is beneficial to society by removing the criminals off the street and preventing them from ever putting people at risk of being victimized by them again.
Upon reviewing the case of People v. Smith 437 Mich. 293 (1991), we find that the defendant Ricky Smith; an adult at the time of the commission of the offenses in question, was a habitual juvenile offender; possessing a juvenile record which included twelve juvenile entries including seven prior felonies, three misdemeanors, was charged, pleaded guilty, and convicted of breaking and entering with the intent to commit larceny and being a habitual offender. As a result of the admission of guilt by Smith, he was sentenced to 3 ½ to 10 years, however, the sentence was vacated after it was determined that Smith was a habitual offender, where the current offense constituted his 4th offense. (Justlaw) Therefore, as a result of the juvenile offenses being taken into consideration for sentencing, Smith received a sentence of 6 to 30 years as a habitual offender. Smith’s argument comes from the admission of his juvenile criminal record which was referenced in the presentencing investigative report, citing that pursuant to former MCR 5.913 which indicates that “the juvenile record of a former offender was expunged at the age of twenty-seven”,(justlaw) and as such, should
Ashley Smith CRJU 1400 LU 7 Review Questions Review Questions for Learning Unit Seven What governs the ethical conduct of lawyers? Discuss the pros and cons of plea bargaining. What has the U.S. Supreme Court held in regards to the professional misconduct of prosecutors? (in terms of punishment) How do forfeiture laws help to deter the conduct of mob lawyers?
In other words, if you commit a crime the second time, you serve double and if you commit the 3rd time, you get sentenced minimum 25 yrs. in jail, no matter what crime it is. This was a new law implemented after a man who was recently paroled. He had many criminal records such as drug possession and gun abuse. At the time of release, he was on influence and was a drug addict.
The Three Strikes Law states that a penalty enhancement should be handed down to anyone who had previously been convicted of one or more supposedly serious or violent felonies. Under the same laws, an offender who had previously been convicted of a violent or serious felony, regardless of how diminished it may be, face the risk of double-sentencing under the guidelines of the second strike. On the other hand, a third- strike sentencing guideline is applied when an offender with two or more previous crimes is convicted. Under this guideline, a minimum of twenty-five years to life is applied. However, for the third-strike sentence to be passed, the previous crimes committed must be either violent or serious.
“The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984” The article, “The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984” (2015), written by Eric Girault, persuades the audience that the enactment of the law did not reduce crime in societies, but was misappropriated, which caused a negative impact on families and their communities. Girault describes this by sharing his personal anecdote on receiving a harsh prison sentence for a non-violent crime as a first time offender. He uses trustworthy resources in order to substantiate his claim. Girault’s intended audience for this piece of writing is the general public, specifically those that lack knowledge of the law and its due process.
Azcourts.gov Arizona Judicial Branch" (2017), “Evidence-based practice (EBP) - means strategies that have been shown through current, scientific research to lead to a reduction in recidivism. EBP is a body of research done through meta-analysis (a study of studies) that has provided tools and techniques that have been proven to be effective at reducing recidivism. These tools and techniques allow probation officers to determine risk and criminogenic characteristics of probationers and place them in appropriate supervision levels and programs. There are eight evidence-based principles for effective offender interventions” (Evidence Based Practice). I may make recommendations for consequences based upon a juvenile’s adjudication.
California’s Three Strikes Law was implemented in order to improve public safety. The murders of Polly Klaas and Kimber Reynolds caused the citizens of California to request a reactive measure in order to improve California’s preventive safety measures. Polly Klaas and Kimber Reynolds were both murdered by repeat offenders. The murders resulted in a public outcry and a petition was started in order to improve the sentencing requirements for repeat offenders (Skelton, 1993). The Three Strikes Law became a source of controversy due to the fact that many people argued that the law was in violation of the Eighth Amendment, which states that, “Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments
In the United States, there are two primary models; Indeterminate and determinate sentencing. Indeterminate sentencing refers to blending decisions provided by the sentencing judge and later from a release authority so the actual time served can be determined. The judge will sentence offenders to indeterminate sentencing during the time of the sentence including the maximum or minimum amount of time that’s to be served. Once an offender serves the minimum amount of time they are qualified for a release by the parole board. However, the maximum sentence may have to be served by the offender if the parole board doesn’t grant an early release.
When a judge is considering sentencing to convict an offender specific deterrence should be more valuable than general deterrence but both are needed in the sentencing process. For the offender not to reoffend specific deterrence need to be embedded to determine the certainty of the crime. So the offender will not commit the same crime twice. Overall doing the sentencing process the judge have the right to use this offender specific deterrence to promote general deterrence to the public. This will allow other to fear the consequences and possibly punishment if they commit this specific crime.
In the United States, habitual offender laws, are statutes enacted by state governments which mandates the courts to impose harsher sentences on those convicted of an offense if they have been previously convicted of two prior serious criminal offenses. What this means is that people that have been put in prison 3 times will get a harsher punishment going from whatever they 're consequence is to life in prison. I am against this law, for reasons I will talk about later. The origin of the three strikes law came from article 2 section 28 of the Montana constitution in 1998, which states the three strikes law.
I will be discussing the key facts and critical issues presented in various roles/goals within the United States (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2015). The The Various roles/goals of Sentencing within the United States. In a narrative format, discuss the key facts and critical issues presented. The various goals of criminal sentencing today are revenge, retribution, just deserts, deterrence, incapacitation, rehabilitation or reformation, and restoration (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2015). The first is revenge.
Introduction Crime, its punishment, and the legislation that decides the way in which they interact has long been a public policy concern that reaches everyone within a given society. It is the function of the judicial system to distribute punishment equitably and following the law. The four traditional goals of punishment, as defined by Connecticut General Assembly (2001), are: “deterrence, incapacitation, retribution, and rehabilitation.” However, how legislature achieves and balances these goals has changed due to the implementation of responses to changing societal influences. Mandatory minimum sentences exemplify this shift.
The Sentencing Reform Act is related to the Complete and thorough Crime Control Act of 1984 were the U.S. federal law increased the consistency in the United States federal sentencing. The Sentencing Reform Act created the United States Sentencing Commission. This act allowed the independent commission into the (law-related) branch of the United States Sentencing Commission. It consists of seven voting members and one nonvoting member. For the benefit of the United States Sentencing Commission, there are rules that establish sentencing policies and practices for the Federal criminal justice system, which secures/makes sure of a meeting of the purposes of sentencing.
With the economy in the turmoil that it is in America cannot continue to support these sentencing guidelines. The Mandatory Article Sentencing declares that the laws are becoming a huge drain on the Justice Bureau’s budget, and in 2012 the United States had far beyond more people incarcerated than any other country. Most of these prisoners are low-level drug offenders sentenced under mandatory sentencing guidelines with a cost draining on American taxpayers $6.8 billion a year, as of 2012. These costs do not seem to have a ceiling and continue eating up about twenty-five percent of the federal justice system’s yearly budget.
