Criminal Justice Corrections: Sentencing - Assignment Example

There are a wide variety of sentencing options available to judges today that range from community service to the death penalty. The type of crime, the severity of the crime, the philosophy of the court, and the law all impact the sentence that a criminal will receive when convicted of a criminal act. There is a wide range of options that a judge has when considering the sentence that a criminal deserves. Minor crimes, such as shoplifting or prostitution, are often handled by sentencing the offender to a fine or probation.

Probation dates back several centuries and has evolved from an informal monitoring procedure to a highly evolved system procedure (County of Suffolk NY, n.d.). Probation is the suspension of a sentence in favor of community monitoring, where the offender has the opportunity for rehabilitation. In addition, the offender may be sentenced to house arrest in which the convicted criminal is restricted in mobility and is only allowed in their home or at their place of employment. This gives the courts a high degree of accountability and restriction while keeping the criminal off the streets and away from the public.

Both probation and house arrest can be effective alternative sentences for first-time offenders or petty criminals who have hope of rehabilitation. Typically, when we think of sentencing for a criminal act, we think of it in terms of incarceration. For more severe crimes such as felonies or crimes of violence, the risk to society of re-offending makes incarceration an effective tool. Criminals may be jailed at a local, state, or federal facility depending upon the nature of the crime and the jurisdiction.

Incarceration rates have risen sharply in recent years from 150 per 100,000 in 1980 to 500 per 100,000 in 2005 (After sharp increases, 2007). The increased rates of incarceration have come not only as a result of an increase in criminal activity but also from conservative attitudes that believe in a get-tough policy on crime (Mears et al., 2007). On the more severe end of sentencing is the death penalty. This sentence is reserved for the most heinous and vicious crimes and serves to demonstrate society's condemnation of certain criminal acts.

The criminal, the crime, and the court will come together to determine an appropriate sentence. The sentence handed down in a court is often the result of the philosophy of the court, and especially of the presiding judge. Sentencing can be viewed as either restorative or retributive. Retributive sentencing seeks to punish the offender without compassion or hope of rehabilitation. Advocates of retributive sentencing believe that stiff sentences act as a deterrent, and when a criminal is deterred there is no need for rehabilitation.

They see sentencing as a punishment. In contrast, restorative sentencing seeks to repair the harm done by the crime and reintegrate the criminal into the community. The sentence may consist of restitution, drug treatment, or community service. Advocates contend that "the one who did the harm gains stronger skills and community connections, the opportunity to develop empathy, and the knowledge that they have corrected their mistake" (Ball, 2003, p.51). While retributive sentencing is based on the concept of 'an eye for an eye', "restorative justice finds pain/punishment often counterproductive for both victim and offender" (Mosak, 2006, p.3).