Analysis and Application: Sentencing - Essay Example

The major goals of sentencing are as follows: 1) to promote and enhance respect for the law; 2) to reflect the severity of the offense; 3) to provide fair punishment for the committed offense; 4) to deter the offender from possible criminal conduct in the future; 4) to protect the general public from the offender; 5) to enable the offender to have specific vocational or educational training, or any other assistance in rehabilitation. According to Champion (2008, p.4), the purposes of sentencing are punishment (retribution), custodial monitoring, control and incapacitation, a criminal’s deterrence and prevention, as well as rehabilitation along with reintegration.

There are different types of sentencing schemes. In most states’ jurisdictions, the following types of sentencing schemes are used: 1) indeterminate sentencing; 2) determinate sentencing; 3) presumptive sentencing; and 4) mandatory sentencing. Incidentally, on the verge of two categories, various hybrid sentencing schemes have emerged (Champion, 2008, p.6). Four major types of sentencing schemes have their distinctive characteristics. Indeterminate sentencing, which was the most widely used type of sentencing for decades, includes establishing explicit lower and upper limits on the particular amount of time which is to be served by the criminal.

This type of sentencing sets the convict’s early-release date which is determined by a specific parole board (Champion, 2008, p.7). Next, determinate sentencing refers to incarceration which is to be served on a full scale, unless the offender has earned some good time when being in prison. Good time assumes that the time served gets reduced “if inmates obey the rules and stay out of trouble” (Champion, 2008, p.7). In other words, an accumulated good time credit fastens the release of a criminal when determinate sentencing is applied.

Further, presumptive sentencing, which is also known as guideline based sentencing, refers to a specific sentence which is typically expressed as a set of months for every particular offense/offense class (Champion, 2008, p.9). This type of sentencing is subject to imposition in all unexceptional cases, yet given some aggravating or in other cases mitigating circumstances, certain latitude is permitted in order to shorten or lengthen sentences by the limit of specific boundaries. Lastly, mandatory sentencing requires the imposition of a certain incarcerative sentence of particular length and for particular crimes or specific groups of offenders, where not a single option exists of probation, immediate parole, or suspended sentence.

For example, in Michigan, an additional 2-year sentence is imposed on a criminal, without a relief from parole, if they commit the crime using a dangerous weapon (Champion, 2008, p.13). Constitutional Rights Important in Criminal Sentencing Just as the concern over the courts’ frequent rejection of constitutional challenges at sentencing is growing, the importance of grappling with the Constitution while sentencing has been recognized. Despite judges’ claims that this approach will be hardly consistent with historical practice and may hamper the judiciary’s capacity to impose an adequate sentence, steps are being made to ensure criminals’ constitutional rights are not disregarded at sentencing.

The constitutional rights important to criminal sentencing are those of double