The Purpose of Criminal Sentencing - Assignment Example

1. Purpose of criminal sentencing: People in the society fall in three broad categories with respect to freedom. These three categories are free humans, the sentenced - those who are undergoing a punishment following a conviction for a criminal offense and the probationers - those who are otherwise sentenced but are allowed to remain free in a community. The commonality amongst free humans and the probationers is that people in these two categories are free to move around but as regards those who have been sentenced by judges have to spend time in jails, prisons or placement in community corrections facilities. As regards the purposes of criminal sentencing, the key purposes are: 1) punishment – it is termed as retribution when punishment is announced by the community. The purpose of this type of sentencing is to make the offender realize that he/she has done something unacceptable to the society. 2) crime reduction: a. General deterrence - to discourage the criminal from repeating an offence. b. Specific deterrence – to discourage public from committing a similar crime. 3) Incapacitation - for some time the criminals are incapacitated by keeping them isolated, that is away from the society. 4) Reform and Rehabilitation – this form of sentencing is aimed at improving the criminal by putting him into various productive and constructive tasks such as education, vocational training etc. In a nut shell, the core objective of criminal sentencing is to facilitate a safe and a peaceful setting for a society. This is achieved by imposing balanced sanctions and by laying protocols those are centered around the following: to segregate offenders from society, to enable offenders to become responsible members of the society, to help the offenders to understand that offences are publicly accepted as incorrect or wrong or evil doings. 2. Different Forms of Sentencings: Based on the severity of the crime, the criminals are sentenced by the judges. Some of the most common forms of sentencings are: 1. The Death Penalty (also termed as Capital punishment): Such a punishment is meant for those who are involved in cold blooded murder. In the United States around 38 states and the federal government can impose capital punishment. 2. Incarceration: Jails and Prisons form punishment under this type of sentencings. Jails are small lock up facilities available in counties and the Sheriffs are responsible for these lock-up centers. Under-trials and those who are unable to seek bail are usually kept in such lock-ups. Prisons are the facilities those house criminals who are serving sentences of a duration that is more than one year. 3. Probation: In the cases when the offense is non-violent, the concerned is not a habitual offender and the offender is willing to improve, he/she is placed on probation. Those on probation are required to pay fines, report to a probation officers, limit their movement within a specified range. In case a probationer commits another crime (or violates any of the terms), then the judge has the authority to revoke the probation. 4. Rigorous Imprisonment (Boot Camps): The offenders sentenced to such punishments are put up in barracks and are required to undergo rigorous training (physical). This punishment is usually imposed on young convicts. After completion of rigorous imprisonment they are then resentenced to probation. 5. Electronic Monitoring: This sentence is also called house arrest. The convicts are required to spend the whole day at a particular place like their own home. In some cases where the convicts are required to be monitored, they are made to wear transmitters on their wrist/ankles. 6. Fines: Fines are imposed on those who commit petty crimes such as shoplifting, traffic violations etc. 7. Restitution: In case of restitution the offenders are required to pay money to victims for compensating the financial loss incurred by the victim. 8. Community Service: This type of sentence is imposed on those who harm public property, the convicts are required to render community service. 9. Asset forfeiture: The assets are forfeited by the government, in case the assets had been used in a criminal activity. 3. Reforms: Advocates, politicians and others associated (directly or indirectly) with the judicial system, including non-governmental associations, have highlighted the need for reforms and restructuring of the judicial system. These reforms have been aimed at devising mechanisms to reduce the crime rate, increased spendings on rehabilitation etc. Key aspects of the criminal law that call for reforms include: 1. To protect innocent Americans, basic protection be added against unjust punishment. 2. To bring in major revisions in the Federal Criminal Code – primarily to give all the Americans an opportunity to enable them to understand what the criminal law requires of them. Re-codification is also required. 3. Federal jury reform – even though an under trial is declared as an innocent the federal indictment on itself works against the concerned to an extent that the image and career may get damaged beyond repairs. It is expected that these and some more reforms will show up in due course of time and the criminal law would inch further towards an idealistic law that would balanced from all perspectives. 4. Current Issues in Federal Sentencing: The United States Sentencing Commission is a judicial government agency. One of its prime objectives is facilitate Congress with respect to the development of effective and efficient crime policy. This is done by preparing Reports to the Congress, these reports highlight the shortcomings and issues in various federal sentencing, some of the issues covered in the reports to Congress are: 1) Based on Section 5(b) of the Disaster Fraud Act, in 2008 USSC conveyed to the Congress that there is a need for aggressive and an appropriate law enforcement action to prevent offenses covered under Disaster Fraud Act. Furthermore, the sentencing under the scope of this act should be consistent with other relevant directives. 2) In 2003, vide their Report to the Congress (‘Increased penalties under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002’) it was conveyed that the offences had an adverse impact. USSC added a new sentencing enhancement that was applicable to offences that threatened financial security of significant number of victims. 3) In 2003, USSC put forward the factors those were not accounted for in the ‘Increased Penalties for Cyber Security Offenses of Homeland Security Act of 2002. These included: there is no indication of the loss that may occur (or has occurred) from the offense. Whether the defendant had a malicious intent. To what extent the offense violated the privacy of the individuals harmed. There are some more issues those have been communicated to The Congress. But not all of these have been included in this essay. 5. Mission of ‘The Sentencing Project’: The Sentencing Project was founded by Malcolm Young in 1986. This project of high social relevance is popular for: campaigning for even better safety solutions for public; enhancing uniform justice for one and all under the law; and questioning and; for questioning criminal justice policies those are silent on certain perspectives. The mission of this project is: “The Sentencing Project works for a more fair and effective criminal justice system by promoting reforms in sentencing law and policy and alternatives to incarceration. To these ends, it seeks to recast the debate about crime and punishment.” (Mauer, 3) 6. Commonalities amongst The Sentencing Project and National Alliance of Sentencing Advocates and Mitigation Specialists: National Alliance of Sentencing Advocates and Mitigation Specialists (NASAMS) is one of the sections of National Legal Aid and Defender Association (NLADA). NASAMS’ purpose is: 1. “to promote the advancement of sentencing advocacy and to develop professional standards; 2. to promote sentencing and confinement decisions and other criminal justice policies based upon principles of fairness, equity, human dignity and effective response to crime; 3. to provide education, training and consultation to members; 4. to provide a forum for professional communication and support and otherwise to foster professional identity among members; 5. to promulgate ethical standards of practice, and 6. to conduct other activities as may be necessary, desirable or incidental to attaining the purpose of the Alliance (NASAMS).”   It can be seen that The Sentencing Project and NASAMS have purpose #2 as the commonality. Both the initiatives strive to enhance uniformity/equity with respect to justice for one and all. References: Mauer, Marc. "Mission Statement." Sentencing Project Annual Report 2005 2005: 1-32. Print. Read More