ONLY FOR MICHAEL SMITH

Criminal justice Discussion

Discussion Question   at least 120 words

· From the textbook readings this week, compare and contrast two (2) sentencing models that were covered.

· “Three Strikes Law”

· “Concurrent sentencing”

Take a position on the strengths and weaknesses of each, and which one you believe is more effective.

Tracy Adair ( she is my classmate)  please reply with at least 60 words

Concurrent sentencing is when a criminal defendant is convicted of two or more crimes, a judge sentences the defendant to a certain period of time for each crime. Sentences that may all be served at the same time, with the longest period controlling, are concurrent sentences. Judges may sentence concurrently out of compassion, plea bargaining, or the fact that the several crimes are interrelated. Mandatory sentences are those sentences which a judicial officer is required to impose regardless of the circumstances of the offense. In other words, the judicial officer has no discretion to impose a higher or lower sentence depending upon the nature of the crime. Typically, people convicted of certain crimes must be punished with at least a minimum number of years in prison.  In my opinion I believe concurrent sentencing is more effective because it allows the criminal defendant to serve his time concurrently at the same time if he was convicted with more than one crime. I think mandatory sentencing is not an effective method of sentencing. Mandatory sentencing tend to target minority groups, they can be unjust and they can create an environment of coercion

Nora Marrero (she is my classmate)  please reply with at least 60 words

Indeterminate Sentencing: Which is when the offender's sentence is identified as a range, rather than a specific time period. The prison term imposed after convictionfor a crime which does not state a specific period of time or release date, but just a range of time, such as "five-to-ten years". It is one side of a continuing debate as to whether it is better to make sentences subject to reduction for good behaviorwithout reference to potential rehabilitation, modification or review in the future.This type of sentencing can benefit some offenders providing them with some hope of limited incarceration, and not lose hope in their future outlook on life. On the flip side, an offender can ‘learn’ how to manipulate the system, do well (good behavior) and released, so now we have a repeated offender re-entering the penal system when he/she should have faced a determinate sentencing.

 

Three Strikes Law: When this law was instituted, the premise was to give an offender mandatory sentencing after three felony convictions.  The positive result was to punish those that continue to commit crimes (in any form) and be held accountable. The law clearly stated that you will receive a harsh sentencing if you get caught after the third time. The disadvantage of the 3 strike law was the unfair sentencing (ie: 20 years) for those individuals convicted of minor violations, such as shoplifting. These minor offenders felt that their Eight Amendment rights were being violated. This law continues to bring controversy, especially in the state of California where violent and nonviolent offenders are grouped in the same category.