Offender Specific Deterrence

The result of this plea was a slightly reduced sentence. 3. The judge cites his reason for sentencing as a deterrent to both the accused and the rest of society. That is to say that the judge hopes the severity of the sentence will deter Mr Austin from offending again and serve as an example of the possible punishments for a crime of this severity to the rest of the public. When deciding the sentence the judge took into account the guilty plea entered by the accused, the impact of the crime on the victim and his family, the circumstances under which the crime was committed and the criminal history of the

Introduction In the article “Black Judges are Tougher on Black and White Offenders”, Dr. Darrell Steffensmeier did exclusive research on prison sentencing and treatment given to both black and white offenders by black and white judges. Steffensmeier provides details that support his finding of how black judges and white judges sentence their defendants differently. Through his study at Penn State University, Steffensmeier gives information that describes the harsher treatment that black defendants may face more than white defendants when it comes to having black judges instead of white judges. In the end, Steffensmeier gives a synopsis of how black judges' emotional state can be an issue while sentencing their defendants and whether the race factor matters in the justice system and the courtroom.

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.

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.

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

The role of the government is to keep everyone and everything in line. The government should have a sentencing reform because with the system we have now it 's just making things worse. Some people are being placed in jail because of their color when there are real criminals that are set free when they really did do something wrong like murdering someone. The government should have a sentencing reform because the system now is just making things worse. To begin with, The government should have a sentencing reform because the system now is just making things worse.

Deterrence is future oriented to prevent crimes. Deterrence has two types general and specific. General is an individual punishment to dissuade others from committing crimes and specific is an individual being punished for additional

Smarter Sentencing can reduce the amount of incarcerations with better sentencing so there are not people getting years in prison and holding up cells so we get new criminals

Individuals who commit the same crime should receive the same sentences, if the this is the individuals first appearance. If one of the individuals has committed the crime before, and then committed it again, this individual needs to be punished more severely, then the one that committed it for the first time because the judicial system needs to show individuals that it is not going to allow an individual to commit the same crime over and over and just get a slap on the wrist for

So in a nut shell, every state has its own set of rules for the punishment of criminals called sentencing guidelines, which are sentencing policies prosecutors and judges use for people convicted of serious misdemeanors and felonies (Peak,2015). The crime and the criminal 's previous criminal history is considered when a judge hands down a sentence. People that oppose alternative sentencing argue that an individual 's circumstances are unique and should be considered during sentencing, otherwise there is a possibility of

In the U.S. criminal justice system, there are two basic sentencing models that the courts use to apply their judgments. These are determinate sentencing and indeterminate sentencing. Determinate sentencing can be referred as a set sentence imposed to an offender this model is based on the famous phrase “Do the crime and will do the time”; however, this model has a unique quality and that is that a parole board can’t overturn the length of the sentence that was imposed. On the other hand indeterminate sentencing can be describe as the length of a sentences that has not being defined yet like the term “25 to life” on this term you can see that the sentencing was not set to an specific time frame, that means that the offenders release date is

Habitual offender statues are derived from the same punitive atmosphere that led to truth in sentencing law. Three strikes and your out rule. These statues mean offenders with a third felony conviction may be sentenced to life imprisonment regardless of the natural of the third felony. Habitual offender statues have affected sentenced in many ways. One way is when you are convicted of that third crime you many be faced with life with out parole (LWOP).

The deterrence theory suggests that “the severity of criminal sanctions dissuades other potential offenders from committing crimes out of fear of punishment. ”4 That is applicable to the individuals that are punished and to people in the community. Nevertheless, prison’s effectiveness is often questioned as an effective deterrent to crime. Studies have shown that longer sentences have a small effect on whether offenders commit crimes or not, and the National Academy of Sciences determined that “insufficient evidence exists to justify predicating policy choices on the general assumption that harsher punishments yield measurable deterrent effects.

Deterrence and the Death Penalty: The Views of the Experts. The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1973-), 87(1), 1. doi:10.2307/1143970 This article was written by Michael L. Radelet and Ronald L. Akers. They both consulted experts on criminology and criminal behaviour to evaluate the effectiveness of the Death Penalty.

There is a worldwide trend in the use of penal imprisonment for serious offenses as capital punishment has been renounced by an increasing number of countries. Harsh punishments include capital punishment, life imprisonment and long-term incarceration. These forms of punishments are usually used against serious crimes that are seen as unethical, such as murder, assault and robbery. Many people believe that harsher punishments are more effective as they deter would-be criminals and ensure justice is served. Opposition towards harsh punishments have argued that harsher punishments does not necessarily increase effectiveness because they do not have a deterrent effect, do not decrease recidivism rates and do not provide rehabilitation.