Sentencing Authority If I was a judge the type of sentencing authority I would most likely have would be indeterminate sentencing. Indeterminate sentencing is the burden of a sentence by detainment with no precise time frame set during the sentencing. Its length, rather, is resolved in light of the detainee's behavior. By abiding with this type of sentencing there is a bigger slack of discretion I can use. I can base more on the individual as a person. If the individual doesn’t have a prior criminal record this will benefit him in my sentencing.
Mitigating Circumstances
Mitigating circumstances is an event or condition that makes an offense less serious than it might be. According to Garvey (1998) mitigating circumstances are events or conditions that do not justify or excuse the criminal behavior that was committed, however are considered out of kindness or reasonableness in choosing the level of the offense. The prosecutor can act upon discretion in such case and lessening the punishment upon conviction. Mitigating circumstances regularly relate more to the guilty party than to the offense. Accepting guilt and collaboration with the examination are frequent examples of mitigating circumstances that would have a tendency to a decrease in sentence (Garvey, 1998).
…show more content…
Drinking and driving was the cause but the mitigating circumstance can be the location where he is coming from, such as a wedding, a bachelor’s party or a family reunion. Being the first time he has ever broken this law can also be a mitigating circumstance. Another straight forward example would be an aggravated assault. Although an aggravated assault is still unlawful provocation may account for mitigating circumstance and will permit a lower
Sentencing disparity within the American Judicial system is a problem that exists across the nation. According to Merriam Webster’s dictionary, disparity means the markedly distinct in quality or character. Many times, disparity is used in conjunction with discrimination as if the two words mean the same, but they do not. Disparity will include a difference in treatment or outcome but is not based on an opinion, bias or prejudice.
Intermediate sanctions is a courts response to the overcrowding prisons in the United States. These sanctions are a step up from probation and a set down from incarceration. With these sanctions, rehabilitation is the primary goal, which is used to reform offenders who return to society. There are several types of intermediate sanctions such as house arrest where the offender confined to their home, which they can not leave unless there is school, job, or court. Fines can be several dollars or several thousands of dollars.
For example, if the criminal, due to finding evidence, does the crime with malicious intentions he will get more years in prison. When someone commits a mitigating crime, it means he or she did something minor that can’t be punished by the death penalty. The court will decide what sanction will be given to the offender.
Inequitable Incarceration The months before and during WW1 in America were a dark and gloomy period for the Japanese-American citizens. Many Japanese-Americans have shared their story of the internment camps during WW1 and Jerry Stanley, a victim of the camps noted, “I am proud that I am an American citizen of Japanese ancestry, for my very background makes me appreciate more fully the wonderful advantages of this nation.” (Stanley 3). Stanley was a proud american and appreciated the freedoms he had.
In the first scenario where Sam Smith committed a robbery in possession of a firearm, the type of sentencing model I would use is a determinate sentence. I think determinate sentencing would be ideal because Sam did accept his responsibility, had no previous criminal record, and no one was injured. He would receive a fixed sentence term for his actions and if he were to have good conduct in jail then he would qualify for an early release based on conduct. The actual sentence I would impose would abide by the Florida minimum mandatory law because of the firearm he was in possession of.
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.
2 In recent years, mandatory sentencing laws have been introduced in NSW. Alcohol related violence mandatory sentence was introduced by the NSW government On 21 January 2014. This was introduced because of the amount of one-punch hits while intoxicated. Teens such as Thomas Kelly and Daniel Christie have been killed because intoxicated people for no reason hit them.
This also benefits the courts as courts have a limited capacity to try cases due to time constraints and costs associated with trials. Therefore, with the prevalent use of plea bargaining, some defendants get sentences that are not reflective of the severity of their crimes and even go so far as to mask the actual crime that was committed, such as when a offender who has committed a sexual offense accepts a guilty plea to a different offense, thus masking the actual sex offense that could have more lasting consequences for the offender (Schmalleger, 2016, p.234). Another
How a juvenile is adjudicated in a federal court can be different from that of a state court. For a juvenile to be adjudicated by a federal court, it must be an act of a violent felony, drug trafficking, importation offense, or a firearms offense (18 U.S.C. § 5032). The act must be a federal criminal violation committed before the age of 18 (18 U.S.C.A. §§ 5031-42). A United States Attorney must prove jurisdiction by certifying that the juvenile case can be heard in a federal court or refer to a state court (28 C.F.R. 0.57). A juvenile must be tried in a federal court within 30 days (18 U.S.C. § 5036).
Judges should have more discretion regarding the sentencing process because the judges are the people who can take all of the facts, look at them, and judge the totality of what the convicted person deserves. Legislatures and citizen initiatives do not have all of this information and so cannot make the same sorts of informed decisions that judges can. When discretion is present in the court case, the judge has the ability to use common sense to enforce the common law and treat people with trust and flexibility. Allowing individuals make mistakes in their past once or twice a second chance follows what judicial discretion is. In most cases, officials should be mutually consistent and transposable on making similar decisions in related cases.
So it is interesting to see how much time the judge and jury thought that the particular crime was deserving of. "An alternative explanation is statistical discrimination, which implies that judges rely on race to predict a felon’s latent criminality in the absence of perfect information"(Park, 2017, pp. 810-823). Sentencing does create many issues, not only on families and jails, but on the inmates mental state as well. Long sentences can tear apart families and force children to grow up in a broken home for the duration of the sentence.
This would allow for the defense’s position by allowing her leniency. It will also address the concerns of the prosecutor by still having a punishment in place if she has any new offenses. This will show her that she is responsible for her behavior and that there are consequences to her actions without being too harsh. In Diane’s case, going through the process will most likely be enough of a lesson for her. If Diane was treated too unfairly and harsh, she may feel that she is a juvenile delinquent by being labeled one, and continue bad behavior (Champion, Merlo, & Benekos,
For example, the parole and supervised release committee must take into consideration the victims opinion when considering a offenders release, thus limiting the boards ability to use it’s discretion on what they may be a more appropriate release date. The goals of the victim-witness program could also potentially limit the prosecutions ability to prosecute the offender for a longer sentence. For example, a victim could potentially want to forgive the offender for the harm they have been cause, therefore, seeking for a more lenient sentence then the prosecution may be seeking, thus constricting the prosecutions
Sentencing- Sentencing is when a judge decides what the criminal justice system should do with a person that has been found guilty of committing an offence. A sentencing can only happen when all the relevant information and facts have been heard by the judge and the jury, and when the defendant has been proven to be guilty for committing the crime. If there is no jury present in a case the judge will decide whether he/ she is guilty. (C. Quirke, 2018)
In addition, they are applied in the transport sector, for example, speeding or driving without insurance. An example of its application is in the R v. Williams 1WLR 588 case in which the offence of casing death while driving without a license was regarded to be one of the strict liability. As a result, a maximum penalty of 2 years imprisonment was given in addition to the 14 years sentence due to the offence of reckless driving leading to death. It has, however, been argued that strict liability is quite harsh and can potentially lead to the creation of injustices.