Sentencing

1
Sentencing

• Chapter 4

2
Overview

• No other area of the criminal justice system has
  more controversy and criticism than the nations
  courts as they struggle to let the punishment
  fit the crime
• Judges have to make these critical decisions amid
  public opinion, prison overcrowding, budget
  shortages, and legislative restrictions on what
  amount of time can be imposed

3
The Correctional Filter

• What is the correctional filter?
• It is the process by which offenders are screened
  and various points as they are processes through
  the system
• They are actually sentenced using alternative
  dispositions instead of using jail or prison
• The ones who do in fact end up in prison are
  considered the worst of the worst

4
The Prosecutors Decision

• Here prosecutors have a broad amount of
  discretion when dealing with felony violators
• They have the power to initiate proceeding
  against a suspect or dismiss the charges
• They also have the power to reduce the charges to
  allow the defendant the opportunity to plead
  guilty to lesser charges
• Experts say prosecutors bargain away 50 to 90 of
  the felony arrests by the police

5
Outcomes of Felony Arrests2000

• 1,232,676
• Arrested
• 609,836
• Adults incarcerated

6
The Sentencing Decision

• Judges are usually sentencing the worst of the
  worst who have not escaped through the criminal
  justice filter
• In deciding in what fashion they will dispose of
  a person they have to look at
• High incidence of violence on the streets
• Large number of drug offenses
• Lengthier determinate sentences

7
Changes in the Sentencing Process

• In the 1930s most state and federal courts were
  under the indeterminate sentencing structure
• Judges could impose sentences with a minimum and
  a maximum term in years
• Ex- 2 to 5 years or 5 to twenty years
• This wide range of sentencing reflected the idea
  of rehabilitation
• The parole board would detect change in the
  offender and eventually recommend release of the
  inmate
• Sentencing remained this way from 1930-1974

8
Sentencing Continued

• In 1974 American sentencing laws began to undergo
  rapid changes in the sentencing process
• The causes were due to
• Prison uprisings at Attica in New York, New
  Mexico, Oklahoma, California, and Florida
• The abuse of discretion by judges, prosecutors,
  and parole boards regarding individual rights
• They were all immune from review and some
  practiced arbitrary decisions without any basis
  for the decision

9
Sentencing Continued

• The idea of rehabilitation was challenged
• This philosophy was seen as hopeless
• Studies also found that there was substantial
  disparity in both racial and class discrimination
• This meant that sentencing practices were unfair
• Lastly politicians were using crime control and
  corrections as a political football

10
New Goals

• In the 70s rehabilitation was still considered
• In the 80s it became something less considered
• Incapacitation was the theme
• The idea was to lock high risk offenders away for
  lengthy periods of time
• In the 90s we came up with Three Strikes and
  Youre Out

11
Reform Options

• As a result there was an attempt to limit
  disparity in sentencing and to limit discretion
  and to establish more detailed criteria for
  sentencing
• Options Included
• Abolish plea bargaining
• Establish plea bargain rules and guidelines
• Setting mandatory minimum sentences
• Establish statutory determinate sentencing
• Require judges to provide reasons for their
  sentencing
• Limiting parole Board discretion
• Abolishing Parole
• Adopting or modifying good time procedures
• Make appellate review routine

12
Reform Effects

• Parole Boards abolished in many states
• Mandatory sentencing guidelines established
• 20 states moved to Determinate Sentencing
• 48 states established a mandatory minimum for at
  least one crime
• 50 jurisdictions created local sentencing
  guidelines

13
Georgia Sentencing Guidelines

• This commission was established in 1999 to design
  a structured system for the state, monitor and
  evaluate the performance of the system, and
  develop other sentencing and correctional
  recommendations, policies and programs requested
  by the Governor. The goals of the structured
  sentencing system are
• To establish certainty in sentencing by ensuring
  that sentences imposed by the courts will
  determine the sentences offenders actually serve
  
• To maintain meaningful judicial discretion in the
  imposition of sentences and sufficient
  flexibility to permit individualized sentences
  based on the circumstances of each case
• To concentrate current and planned prison
  capacity on the incarceration of violent, sex and
  career offenders
• To establish a comprehensive range of
  correctional options in each region of the state
  that ensures offenders receive the most
  appropriate penalties and
• To ensure that there exists no unwarranted
  differences in sentences between offenders who
  have committed similar offenses and have similar
  criminal histories.

14
Predicting Behavior

• The criminal sentence is meant to be the
  cornerstone for reintegration
• Judges face pressure from
• Police
• Prosecutors
• General public
• Do we ask judges to predict human behavior?
• Judges must rely on a presentence report
  intuition experience, and imagination.

15
Presentence Investigation

• Georgia defendants have a right to a presentence
  investigation prior to sentencing may be waived
• Prepared by the Probation Department
• Provides the sentencing judge information about
  the defendant in summary form. Includes
• Facts about the present offense
• Previous criminal record
• School and educational history
• Employment History
• Physical and Mental Health
• May be used by correctional agencies or
  institutions for classification and program
  activities assignments

16
Judicial v. Administrative SentencingSimilarities

• Judge imposes sentence administratively
  shortened by use of parole, pardon, good-time,
  etc.
• Decision making at both levels include
• Decision maker influenced by pressures of local
  community and colleagues
• Crime classified as mitigated, average or
  aggravated
• Past criminal record considered
• Offenders attitude and extent of repentance
  reviewed
• Must anticipate public reaction to sentencing
  decision

17
Administrative SentencingParole

• Georgia's two-strikes legislation, passed in
  1995,mandates that persons convicted for the
  first time of murder, rape, armed robbery,
  kidnapping, aggravated sodomy, aggravated sexual
  battery, or aggravated child molestation, serve
  all of their prison sentence without possibility
  of parole. Persons convicted a second time of any
  of those seven crimes receive a life sentence

18
Administrative SentencingParole
19
Administrative SentencingParole
20
Sentencing Concerns

• Sentencing decisions are impacted by rates of
  release
• Because we have a finite number of jail cells, if
  we sentence offenders to confinement at a faster
  rate than we release them from confinement,
  overcrowding will result
• Sentencing must reflect both the numbers of
  prisoners in the institutions and limited
  resources for handling them.

21
Formalized Sentencing

• Six basic strategies to formalize legislative
  control over the sentencing process
• Determinate sentencing no parole discretion
• Mandatory prison terms exact sentences set by
  legislators
• Sentencing guidelines sentence set according to
  specific guidelines, eliminating judicial
  discretion
• Parole guidelines rules for structured release
  criteria
• Emergency crowding provisions relieve crowding
  by systematically making inmates eligible for
  release sooner

22
Deterrence by Sentencing

• Rates of crime DO NOT go down with increased
  imprisonment
• Rates of crime go up when the proportion of
  offenders sentenced to prison increases