Correctional Practices
lexistrick
Sentencing.pptx
Chapter 3: Sentencing
Sentencing
Imposition of a criminal sanction by a sentencing authority.
Sentence: Penalty a court imposes on a person convicted of a crime.
Social order: Smooth functioning of social institutions, positive and productive relations among individual members of society, and orderly functioning of society as a whole.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Goals of Corrections
Revenge: Punishment as vengeance.
Emotional response to real or imagined injury or insult.
Retribution: Retaliation against a criminal perpetrator.
Belief that victims are entitled to reprisal.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Goals of Corrections 2
Just deserts: Punishment deserved.
Criminal offenders are morally blameworthy and are hence deserving of punishment.
Deterrence: Discouragement or prevention of crimes through the fear of punishment.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Goals of Corrections 3
Specific deterrence: Deterrence of the individual being punished from committing additional crimes.
General deterrence: Use of the example of individual punishment to dissuade others from committing crimes.
Pleasure-pain principle (hedonistic calculus): Idea that actions are motivated primarily by a desire to experience pleasure and avoid pain.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Goals of Corrections 4
Incapacitation: Use of imprisonment or other means to reduce an offender’s capability to commit future offenses.
Three-strikes laws: Impose mandatory prison sentences, generally a life sentence, on those convicted of an offense if they have been previously convicted of two prior serious criminal offenses.
Truth in sentencing: The sentencing principle that requires an offender to serve a substantial portion of the sentence and reduces the discrepancy between the sentence imposed and actual time spent in prison.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Goals of Corrections 6
Rehabilitation: Changing of criminal lifestyles into law-abiding ones.
Involves correction of behavior through treatment, education, and training.
Reintegration: Process of making the offender a productive member of the community.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Goals of Corrections 7
Restoration: Process of returning to their previous condition all those involved in or affected by crime.
Restorative justice: Systematic response to wrongdoing that emphasizes healing the wounds of victims, offenders, and communities caused or revealed by crime.
Victim-impact statement: Description of the suffering that a crime has caused victims.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Restorative Justice or Community Justice Programs
Victim–offender mediation.
Victim–offender reconciliation.
Victim-impact panels.
Restorative justice panels.
Community reparative boards.
Community-based courts.
Family group conferences.
Circle sentencing.
Court diversion programs.
Peer mediation.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Sentencing Options
Probation.
Intermediate sanctions.
Jail and prison.
Parole.
Capital punishment.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Types of Sentences 1
Mandatory sentences: Sentences required by law under certain circumstances.
Consecutive sentences: Sentences served one after the other.
Imposed when a person is convicted of multiple offenses.
Concurrent sentences: Sentences served together.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Types of Sentences 2
Flat sentences: Specify an amount of time to be served in custody and do not allow variation from the time specified.
Indeterminate sentences: Judge specifies a maximum and a minimum length of time, and generally a parole board determines the actual time of release.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Types of Sentences 3
Determinate sentence: Sentence of a fixed term of incarceration.
Can be reduced by good time.
Good time: Amount of time prison authorities deduct from a sentence for good behavior and other reasons.
Presumptive sentence: Expected sentence.
Judges are expected to follow unless they document reasons for departing from the guidelines.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Types of Sentences 4
Sentencing commission: Creates a schedule of sentences that reflect the gravity of the offenses committed and the prior record of the offender.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Types of Sentences 5
Sentencing enhancements: Legislatively approved provisions that mandate longer prison terms:
For specific criminal offenses committed under certain circumstances.
Because of an offender’s past criminal record.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Capital Punishment
Lawful imposition of the death penalty.
Was once common throughout the world.
Began changing in the 18th century during the Enlightenment.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Exhibit 3.4: State-Ordered Criminal Executions Worldwide in 2017
Source: Amnesty International, Death Sentences and Executions 2017.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Exhibit 3.5: Jurisdictions With and Without Capital Punishment
Source: Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Prisoner Statistics program.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Exhibit 3.6: Characteristics of Prisoners Under Sentence of Death, January 1, 2019
Source: Death Penalty Information Center.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Methods of Execution
Lethal injection.
Electrocution.
Lethal gas.
Hanging.
Firing squad.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Arguments for and against Death Penalty
Pros.
Cons.
Deters people from committing crime.
Just punishment for murder.
Constitutionally appropriate.
Reduces time spent on death rows, thereby reducing costs.
Protects society.
More humane than life imprisonment.
Almost impossible for an innocent person to be executed.
Does not deter crime.
Violates human rights.
Falls disproportionately on racial minorities.
Costs too much.
Boosts the murder rate, known as the brutalizing effect.
Not everyone wants vengeance.
Arbitrary and unfair.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
21
Courts and the Death Penalty
Mandatory death penalty.
Death sentence that the legislature has required to be imposed upon people convicted of certain offenses.
Guided discretion.
Decision making bounded by general guidelines, rules, or laws.
Bifurcated trial.
Two separate hearings for different issues in a trial, one for guilt and the other for punishment.
Mitigating circumstances.
Factors that may reduce the culpability of the offender.
Aggravating circumstances.
Factors that may increase the culpability of the offender.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
22
Exhibit 3.8: The Capital Criminal Process: Trial Through State and Federal Post convictions
Source: James S. Liebman, Jeffrey Fagan, and Valerie West, A Broken System: Error Rates in Capital Punishment Cases, 19 73–19 95 (New York: Columbia University School of Law, 2000), p. 23.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Appealing the Death Penalty 1
Legal issues about the trial and sentence are appealed to the state appellate courts.
Serious error: Error that substantially undermines the reliability of the guilt finding or death sentence imposed at trial.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Appealing the Death Penalty 2
If the defendant’s direct appeals are unsuccessful and the Supreme Court denies review, state postconviction appeals begin.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Appealing the Death Penalty 3
Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (A E D P A) defines filing deadlines and limits reasons for second, or successive, federal appellate reviews to:
New constitutional law.
New evidence that could not have been discovered at the time of the original trial.
New facts that, if proven, would be sufficient to establish the applicant’s innocence.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Wrongful Convictions and Capital Punishment
Error found by the Liebman study.
Incompetent defense lawyering.
Cost of serious errors.
Danger to society.
Monetary settlements.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Banning the Execution of People with Mental Retardation and Juveniles
Held by the U.S. Supreme Court that execution of offenders with mental retardation as cruel and unusual punishment.
Prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.
Courts left the definition of mental retardation up to individual states.
Some states set I Q score of 70 or below as an indicator of mental retardation.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Banning the Execution of People with Mental Retardation
Unconstitutional and in violation of the Eighth Amendment.
Reasons for being banned.
Reflects evolving standards of decency that mark the progress of a maturing society.
Adolescents lack mature judgment, are less aware of the consequences, are more vulnerable than adults to peer pressure, and are more impulsive.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Sentencing Trends and Reforms
Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 reduced the disparity in sentencing between crack and powder cocaine offenses.
Mandatory minimum sentencing was reserved for the most violent offenders.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Reducing Prison Populations and Costs
Types of reforms that have been implemented by states and the federal government to reduce prison populations and costs are as follows:
Sentencing modifications.
Probation and parole revocation reforms.
Changes in the criminal law.
Using jails instead of prisons.
Early release.
Juvenile sentencing reforms.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Make Better Informed Criminal Justice Policy Using Evidence-Based Practices
Evidence-based, data-driven practices and reliance on the support of external groups of experts and stakeholders are being used to:
Reduce prison populations.
Strengthen community-based punishments.
Balance budgets.
Improve public safety.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Fair Sentencing
Sentencing practices that incorporate fairness for both victims and offenders.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
Issues in Sentencing
Proportionality.
Severity of punishment should match the seriousness of the crime for which the sentence is imposed.
Equity.
Similar crimes and offenders should be treated alike and sentences should be guided by established, regularly applied standards or guidelines.
‹#›
© McGraw Hill
