Comparing The State And Federal Objectives Of Sentencing

Sentencing Paper
Rachel Urban
CJA/234
February 25th, 2015
Richard Gilbert

In this paper the topics that will be discussed will be what are the state and federal objectives of punishment? How does sentencing affect the state and federal corrections systems overall? With support for that answer, what is the determinate and indeterminate sentencing? As well as which sentencing model that is felt the most appropriate? With an explanation as to why and examples will be provided. The state and federal objectives for punishment well they have three main goals, these being to punish the guilty, to protect the public and to rehabilitate the offender. Punishment is the most obvious goal of the correctional system, for the guilty
to be punished for the crime they are found guilty of having commented. The theory is that is supposedly to serve as a deterrent against someone repeating the criminal activity, as well as set an example to others of why they should avoid committing the same acts. Incarceration is the most common form of punishment, but the death penalty and other lesser penalties such as probation are also designed to be punitive. (EHow, 2012) Protection is an additional responsibility for the correctional system, to protect the rest of society from the criminals and the acts of crime. This includes such things such as policing the streets and imprisonment of the criminals in jails and prisons. Because by housing the criminals in jail or the prisons, this keeps them from among the public, and keeps the public out of the position of harm with their additional acts of crime. Rehabilitation is also supposed to be a responsibility of the correctional system, to rehabilitate the inmates. If rehabilitation is done well, then it can make the criminal more functional in with normal society after they are released. Some of the rehabilitation may include such things like vocational training, counseling and drug rehabilitation treatment. It is to help the criminal from being a cost on society to being or becoming a contributing member of society. Sentencing of the criminals if they are sentenced to serve time in prison has a profound effect on the state and federal corrections system. Because with more crimes being committed, the state and federal corrections are becoming more and more overcrowded. This not only causes the problem of overcrowding, but more expense and financial burden to those facilities to house and provide for the inmates. With there already not being enough in state budgets to provide for those that were in the system prior, it strains it even more with more added to it. There is also the fact the more inmates you have, then you have to increase your personnel, to work and guard the inmates as well as those that provide other service for the treatment of the inmates.
That when the economy was strong and the governments were experiencing budget surpluses, it was easy to expand prison space and the other correctional services that were needed to meet the burgeoning population that was under supervision, but with the tightening of budgets.
It is however a more complicated decision now, to either increase taxes or to reduce the correctional population, or whether to eliminate some of the services or the supervision that are used or needed to make up for the shortfalls. Since tax revenues are not unlimited, and the correctional budgets have increased at the expense of the other state agencies, the elected officials have put increasing demands on the corrections to assume a more proactive role in reducing the burden on the taxpayers. (Seiter, 2011, pg
510) Determinate sentencing is sentences of fixed terms. It is often based on where the individual characteristic of the offender are not regarded in the sentencing decision; but the sentencing is totally based on the severity of the crime as well as the past history of the criminal. It is becoming where it is replacing indeterminate sentencing. Indeterminate sentencing is sentences that have a minimum and maximum time to serve and the decision by a release authority determines the actual time served within that range.
A majority of the states have done away with this because of the need to decrease the prison population. With this being said the indeterminate sentencing is the better model that is more appropriate for determining the release of inmates. Because even though there are valid reason for most states to turn to determinate sentencing, is also has many problems that come with it also. The main reasons that indeterminate sentencing should be used more are:
1. Determinate sentences, the inmates serve shorter sentences than they do with parole. But the parole boards consider the dangerousness of the offenders, so that they are not released before they should be. 2.
2. Without parole, then there are fewer ways in which to hold the inmates accountable for their misconduct and to make them head to discipline, so that they have to attempt at trying to have a good record before going in front of the parole board. 3.
3. Elimination of the parole may reduce discretionary release decisions, but prosecutorial discretion is only a substitute. This only cause the discretion that is exercised in private, and there is no review or public consideration of the use of plea
bargaining.
4. Advantage of the use of parole boards is they can reduce disparity in sentencing decisions that may be by an individual judge if there were no sentencing guidelines.
5. Parole boards, consciously can act as a safety valve for prison overcrowding. Formally the parole board can identify the more deserving inmates for release when it is a need because of prison overcrowding.
6. In some states (such as Maine), abolishing parole has also meant abolishing supervision of convicts after their release. (Seiter, 2011)
References Seiter, R. (2011).
Corrections: An introduction (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Prentice Hall eHow. (2012). Role of the Correctional System. Retrieved from http://www.ehow.com/about-5087269-role-correctional-system.html