Punishment and Sentencing Chapter Eleven Punishment and Sentencing

Learning Objectives Describe the historical development of punishment List the major goals of contemporary sentencing Distinguish among general and specific deterrence, incapacitation, and retribution Compare rehabilitation with just desert Explain how sentences are imposed

Learning Objectives Classify the various types of sentencing structures Discuss how people are sentenced today Describe the nature of capital punishment in the United States and abroad Articulate the arguments for and against capital punishment Discuss the legality of the death penality

The History of Punishment Historically, people who violated the law were considered morally corrupt and in need of strong discipline In early Greece and Rome, the most common state-administered punishment was banishment or exile Learning Objective 1

The History of Punishment The Middle Ages, People found guilty of crimes faced a wide range of punishment including: Physical torture Branding Whipping Death (for most felony offenses) The main emphasis of criminal law and punishment was on maintaining public order Learning Objective 1

The History of Punishment The development of the common law in the eleventh century brought some standardization to penal practices End of the 16th century Many offenders were made to do hard labor for their crimes Learning Objective 1

The History of Punishment In England Transporting convicts to the colonies became popular By 1820 Long periods of incarceration in walled institutions called reformatories or penitentiaries began to replace physical punishment in England and the United States Learning Objective 1

The Goals of Punishment The objectives of criminal sentencing can be grouped into distinct areas: General deterrence Incapacitation Specific deterrence Retribution/Just desert Rehabilitation Diversion Equity/restitution Restoration Learning Objective 2

The Goals of Punishment General Deterrence People should be punished to set an example for others Should be proportionate and fair Effect is less than desired Learning Objective 3

The Goals of Punishment Incapacitation Preventing crime by keeping offenders under state control Evidence is mixed Other factors that have an influence: Population makeup Police effectiveness Drug use The economy Diminishing effects over time Learning Objective 3

The Goals of Punishment Specific Deterrence The experience of suffering punishment should inhibit future law violations To convince offenders that the pains of punishment are greater than the potential benefits of crime Mixed results in the research regarding effectiveness Learning Objective 3

The Goals of Punishment Retribution/Just Desert The punishment should fit the crime Those who violate the rights of others deserve to be punished Learning Objectives 3

The Goals of Punishment Rehabilitation The justice system is obligated to help these unfortunate people and not simply punish them for their misdeeds Proper treatment will prevent future crimes Learning Objective 4

The Goals of Punishment Diversion Aimed at sparing nondangerous offenders from the stigma and labeling of a criminal conviction and further involvement with the justice process Diverted to a community correctional program for treatment Learning Objective 2

Thinking Point As part of diversion, the convicted offender may be asked to make restitution payments to the crime victim or participate in a community based program that features counseling. What types of nonviolent offenses do you think would fit with the goals of diversion? Are there any nonviolent offenses that you believe aren’t appropriate for diversion? Why or why not? Learning Objective 2

The Goals of Punishment Equity/Restitution The action or practice of awarding each person his/her just due Seeks to compensate individual victims and the general society for their losses due to crime Learning Objective 2

The Goal of Punishment Restoration Defendants may be asked to confront their behavior, the damage they caused the victim, and the shame they brought to their family, friends, and community Learning Objective 2

Thinking Point Crime and Punishment Which goal of punishment do you believe is the most important? Why? Does it matter what the offense is? Why or why not? Learning Objective 2

Imposing the Sentence Concurrent Sentences Consecutive Sentences Served at the same time Consecutive Sentences Served one after the other The Effect of Good Time Reduction in sentence for good behavior Learning Objective 5

Consecutive vs. Concurrent Sentences Figure 11.1 Consecutive vs. Concurrent Sentences

Sentencing Models Indeterminate Sentences Determinate Sentences Offenders are placed in confinement only until they are rehabilitated and then released on parole Determinate Sentences A fixed term of years to be served by the offender sentenced to prison for a particular crime Learning Objective 6

Sentencing Models Sentencing Guidelines The Sentencing Grid Regulate the length of determinate sentences Curb judicial discretion Created by sentencing commissions The Sentencing Grid Prior record Current offense Learning Objective 6

Sentencing Models Legal Challenges and Their Impact Apprendi v. New Jersey (Judges can only use the information provided in court to the jury for sentencing) Blakely v. Washington (Similar to Apprendi case, places a more restrictive hold on judges flexibility in sentencing) United States v. Booker (other than a prior conviction, only facts admitted by a defendant or proved beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury may be used to calculate a sentence exceeding the prescribed statutory maximum sentence) Learning Objective 6

Sentencing Models Mandatory Sentences Fixed prison sentence for certain crimes Chronic recidivists (repeat offender) Limits judicial discretion Learning Objective 6

Sentencing Models Three Strikes Laws Truth in Sentencing Long prison sentences for any person convicted of three felony offenses Legal controls Truth in Sentencing Require offenders serve a substantial amount of sentence Elimination or reduction of parole and good time Learning Objective 6

Thinking Point The research on three-strikes laws doesn’t really support any kind of deterrent effect, and hasn’t led to a significant reduction in crime. If there is no proven deterrent effect and no reduction in crime, do you support three-strikes laws? Why or why not? Some research suggests that three-strikes laws may actually increase crime as offenders who face life terms go to lethal lengths to resist apprehension. Does this influence your view of these laws? Learning Objective 6

How People Are Sentenced What Factors Affect Sentencing? The severity of the offense The offender’s prior criminal record Whether the offender used violence Whether the offender used weapons Whether the crime was committed for money Learning Objective 7

How People Are Sentenced What Factors Affect Sentencing? Social class Gender Age Victim characteristics Race Learning Objective 7 Martin Caballero’s family (from left, stepson William Cruz, daughter Jessica Caballero, stepdaughter Nancy Cruz, stepson Christian Martinez, and wife Libia Martinez) make a victim impact statement before Judge Michael Donio during sentencing of Craig Arno for the murder of Martin Caballero in Superior Court, Mays Landing, New Jersey, May 24, 2012.

Thinking Point Victim impact statements are permitted in some form in all 50 states. Research is mixed regarding whether the statement is helpful or harmful to the defendant at sentencing. If there is a prejudicial impact on the sentencing of the defendant, should victim impact statements still be allowed? Why or why not? Why do you think victim impact statements are important? Learning Objective 7

Capital Punishment More than 14,500 confirmed executions have been carried out since 1608 Today there are more than 3000 people on death row In recent years the Supreme Court has limited the death penalty to first-degree murder, and only with aggravating circumstances Learning Objective 8

Executions Learning Objective 8 FIGURE 11.4 Number of persons executed in the United States, 1930–2011 Source: Tracy L. Snell, Capital Punishment, 2012 (Washington, DC: Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2014), p. 1.

Capital Punishment Arguments for the Death Penalty Incapacitation Deterrence Morally correct Proportional to the crime Reflects public opinion Unlikely chance of error Learning Objective 9 Defense lawyer Kevin Spellacy checks the reaction of Denny Obermiller to hearing a sentence of death pronounced by a three-judge panel in his sentencing on February 25, 2011. Obermiller pleaded guilty to multiple counts of aggravated murder, kidnapping, rape, and other crimes.

Capital Punishment Arguments against the Death Penalty Possibility of error Unfair use of discretion Misplaced vengeance Weak public support Little deterrent effect No hope of rehabilitation Race, gender, and other bias Causes more crime than it deters It is brutal It is expensive Morally wrong Learning Objective 9

Capital Punishment Several prominent cases have created our current understanding of capital punishment: Furman v. Georgia Gregg v. Georgia Ring v. Arizona Atkins v. Virginia Roper v. Simmons Kennedy v. Louisiana Baze v. Rees Learning Objective 10