From doing the crime to doing time: How just is our criminal justice system?
Your friends’ trial for shoplifting was relatively short, lasting just two days. The prosecution relied heavily on evidence from the videotape, which clearly showed them stuffing merchandise into a bag. A store clerk also testified that your friends left the store carrying the bag without paying for anything. Your friends’ attorney argued that they meant to pay for the goods but simply forgot. The jury found this argument unconvincing and returned a verdict of guilty on the charge of grand theft.
After the verdict, your friends were taken to a nearby detention facility to await sentencing. This is the moment when the judge announces the punishment for a crime. After the sentence is announced, your friends may have the opportunity to file an appeal.
In some trials, the jury may recommend a particular sentence as punishment for a crime. Ultimately, though, it is the judge’s responsibility to assign a sentence. Judges try to make the punishment fit the crime and the criminal, assigning tougher penalties for more serious crimes or repeat offenders. However, that task is not always clear-cut.
Judges consider many factors before handing down a sentence. Often, they will request a presentence report, prepared by the court staff. This report provides details about the crime and the sentence report, prepared by the court staff. This report provides details about the crime and the surrounding circumstances. It supplies background on the defendant, including any criminal record the defendant may have. It also offers a recommendation on sentencing.
If the recommendation is imprisonment, judges can choose to apply either indeterminate or determinate sentencing. Indeterminate sentencing means assigning the criminal a variable term in prison, ranging from a minimum sentence to a maximum sentence. A review board may examine the case every few years to decide whether the inmate should be eligible for parole, or an early release from prison. For example, a judge might hand down a sentence of 10 to 15 years for a robbery conviction. A parole board might decide, however, that the prisoner is eligible for release after seven years in prison. Factors involved in that decision might include the inmate’s behavior and his or her chances of staying out of trouble after returning to society.
Determinate sentencing, on the other hand, means that the judge sets a specific amount of time that a criminal must serve in prison. This option often rules out any possibility of parole, and the criminal is given a fixed date for his or her release.
In some cases, a defendant is convicted of multiple crimes and therefore given multiple sentences. In such cases, the judge may prescribe a concurrent sentence, in which the defendant serves each sentence at the same time. For example, if a person convicted on two charges received a sentence of ten years and another of five years, a concurrent sentence would release the inmate in no more than ten years.
On the other hand, the judge might prescribe a consecutive sentence. In that case, the same criminal would serve the two sentences back to back, for a total of 15 years, with little chance of parole.
In addition to imprisonment, a judge may choose from among other sentencing options, including those listed below. These options may be assigned on their own or in combination with others.
The goal of sentencing is usually one of three outcomes, or a combination of all three: deterrence, rehabilitation, and incapacitation. The idea of deterrence is to assign a harsh enough sentence to discourage criminals from committing another crime. Rehabilitation is the process of helping criminals change so that they can live productive lives and be less likely to resort to crime in the future. Incapacitation ensures that criminals are locked up so that they can no longer pose a threat to society.
The most extreme form of punishment, the death penalty, has long been controversial. Some critics of capital punishment claim that it violates the Eighth Amendment, which forbids «cruel and unusual punishment. ”In 1976, however, the Supreme Court determined that capital punishment was permitted under the Constitution.
Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has decided against capital punishment in certain cases. In 1986, for example, it concluded that executing a prisoner who has been diagnosed as insane is unconstitutional. In 2002, it came to the same conclusion about the execution of mentally retarded persons. Three years later, in the case of Roper v. Simmons, the Court considered the question of capital punishment for juveniles. At the age of 17, Christopher Simmons had been sentenced to death by a state court. In its decision, the Court said that executing minors is prohibited by the Eighth Amendment.
Defendants who believe that they were wrongfully convicted have the right to appeal to a higher court. Their appeal will be heard, however, only if they can reasonably argue that the judge in their case committed an error of law. Though many appeals are filed every year, only a few are actually reviewed by appeals courts. From that handful of cases, even fewer have their original conviction overturned.
Reasons for requesting an appeal vary, depending on the case. Defendants may appeal because they believe the jury selection was flawed, their lawyer was ineffective, or the law was not interpreted correctly. They may also appeal because they feel their due process rights were denied, which was the issue in the 1963 case of Brady v. Maryland.
In the Brady case, the defendant appealed his conviction for murder on the grounds that the prosecution concealed evidence that might have influenced the death sentence he received. This evidence showed that although the defendant had been involved in the crime, another person had actually committed the murder.
The Maryland Court of Appeals, the state’s supreme court, upheld Brady’s conviction but said a lower court should review his death sentence. The Supreme Court agreed, arguing that withholding evidence violates due process “where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment.”
On average, criminal defendants win on appeal only about one in eight times. In those cases, the appeals court sends instructions to a lower court to retry the case under different conditions. In about half of these cases, however, the defendants are found guilty a second time.