Criminal Sentencing - Essay Example

Effectiveness of Criminal Sentencing Introduction Criminal sentencing usually aims at achieving various goals, which include punishment, deterrence, retribution, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. Sentencing is a decree given by a court of law to punish lawbreakers. It is the final stage of a judgment process and a judge does the ruling. Criminal sentencing can take place in different forms such as imprisonment, paying of fines, community service, house arrest, probation and other forms of punishments. Sometimes punishments occur in combination (Siegel, 2010), like for example, both imprisonment and paying a fine or both community service and paying a fine. This depends on gravity of the offence committed. Imprisonment can occur consecutively if the defendant is found guilty of multiple crimes. The crimes will be ready separately, but the period of imprisonment will equal the sum of all the sentences. The sentence will occur concurrently the imprisonment period will equal the length of the longest period. Sometimes a sentence gets reduced to a less harsh sentence, and this is known as mitigation. The sentence is therefore, said to have been mitigated or commuted. Serious charges such as murder, robbery with violence and genocide are rarely reduced (34). Offenders charged with murder are however, sometimes lucky and their charges are mitigated to manslaughter. Criminal sentencing in different legal systems is governed by statutes. These provide specifications on a range of sentences that can be used to punish various forms of crimes. They offer guidelines on how a court should give penalties and regulates the kind of punishment to be given within a certain range depending on gravity of the offense and character of the defendant. Sometimes a penalty is stiffer particularly if the sentencing law considers certain defendants dangerous, like armed criminals or offenders who break the law time and again. Such defendants may face an increased sentence. Sometimes defendants can get additional charges from the state particularly if their cases are beyond the terms of sentencing. Such additional state actions are referred to as collateral consequences and are not imposed by the judge. Examples of such actions include loss of professional licenses eviction from a public property, disentitlement of various loans, and even disenfranchisement. Some crimes require civil action and an investigation is normally done. If the charges trigger civil statutes, then punishment can occur in the form of deportation if the defendant belongs to another country or even revocation of professional licenses (67). Sentencing is remarkably effective in the provision of justice. Its effectiveness can be categorized in various ways. It ensures that crime is prevented by deterring the offender and other people from committing similar offences. It also protects the community from such sentenced offenders particularly those with proved dangerous behaviors. Sentencing ensures that offenders are effectively rehabilitated. It ensures retribution of the offender and makes the offenders accountable for their mistakes. Sentencing also ensures that the conduct of the offender is denounced, and the community recognizes the harm done by such an offender. All these purpose work hand in hand and none of them can be used alone without the others. Deterrence This is a theory of punishment that ensures that other persons in society do not commit similar offences. It is based in the assumption that the harsher the punishment, the greater effect on other people. This is known as deterrent effect. Criminal law usually aims to achieve this in order to deter the offender and other people in the society from breaking the law. Out of fear of punishment, other people in the society will most likely not break the law in the similar way as the convicted offender. For deterrent to be powerful, the law must state clearly with guarantee and certainty that all people who broke the law in a similar way would be apprehended, convicted, and punished in a specific manner. Deterrence occurs in two forms, general deterrence, and specific deterrence. General deterrence uses the sentenced person for crime, as an example to discourage people from committing such crimes. Specific deterrence is used where offenders are punished to discourage them from committing similar crimes in the future. Whether deterrence is effective or not, is a question of debate. To some extent, deterrence is effective when applied with swiftness, certainty, and severity. The rate of number the people who commit similar crimes is high. Those who relapse into crime are many. This shows that judicial systems are yet to use deterrence with effectiveness. Logically deterrence cannot apply for some crimes such as of that of passion and those committed under the influence of external factors such as drugs and alcohol. Evidence based facts show that the use of deterrent is weak particularly in controlling crime or punishing a perpetrator. Specific deterrence is applied in cases, which have weight such as armed robberies, fraud, drug offences, sexual assaults, murder among other serious crimes. General deterrence is used for in cases, which have little weight. It is also attributed cases involving offenders suffering from mental conditions because such people cannot serve as examples to others (Siegel, 2010). Incapacitation Incapacitation is a theory of punishment that ensures positive prevention of crime in the present, rather than deterrence, which prevents future offending. For example, once offenders go to prison then they are removed from the society where they can commit similar offences or influence other people to commit such offences. It is effective particularly when used on habitual offenders who relapse into crime after serving their sentences. If such offenders go for a long-term imprisonment, then elimination of some crimes in the society is achieved. The criminals are removed off the streets and, the public is protected. Incapacitation is highly effective if such an offender remains locked up. Incapacitation existed even in the traditional laws of Native Americans and Africans where hands of thieves were chopped off to prevent further thefts. Even though, Incapacitation is effective since it reduces crime, it has it drawbacks. According to Siegel (2010), the method of punishment comes with increased costs on both the Government and the affected families in society. The Government incurs expenses when building more, prisons, providing basic needs of such prisoners and prison operation costs. The affected families experience disruption particularly if the offender is a breadwinner of such a family. Rehabilitation This is process of changing the perpetrator to adopt lawful ways of life and discard the unlawful practices. The process involves the use of interventions such as counseling, drug treatment program, involving offenders to participate in activities that promote respect of law, among others. Rehabilitation is a correctional process rather than punitive. Evidence shows that, the method is not effective and cannot reduce crime largely. Evaluations on this method show that it requires adequate funding. First time criminal are also likely to be rehabilitated than those who repeat crimes. Retribution Retribution is a form of justice that considers proportioning the gravity of an offence committed to a certain form of punishment. A severe crime is punished more harshly than a minor crime without necessarily considering equivalence to the crime. It uses the notion of “an eye for an eye” One drawback of this form of justice is that it is difficult to weigh and match punishment to a specific crime. The theory is always dependent on the past, to determine which forms of punishment to allocate a present crime. It is not an effective way of sentencing, since some offenders do not get a punishment that matches the severity of crimes they committed. Conclusion Criminal sentencing is the last stage of the judgment process that occurs in a court of law. Offenders can get different forms of sentences such as imprisonment, paying of fines, community service, house arrest, and probation among others. Criminal sentencing usually aims at achieving various objectives that are theorized in the judicial system, and aim at reducing or preventing crime. They include deterrence, retribution, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. Deterrence cannot apply in some forms of crimes such as that of passion therefore, not entirely effective. Incapacitation is quite effective since it locks up the offender, preventing an occurrence of such a crime. Retribution is not a fair form of justice considering the fact that one cannot measure what form of punishment to offer a specific crime. It howevers discourages crime to some extent. Rehabilitation is not effective since it is not applicable to some offenders such as habitual and violent criminals. Reference Siegel, L. J. (2010). Introduction to criminal justice. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, Cengage Learning. Read More