Essay Available:
Pages:
9 pages/≈2475 words
Sources:
3
Style:
MLA
Subject:
Social Sciences
Type:
Essay
Language:
English (U.S.)
Document:
MS Word
Date:
Total cost:
$ 38.88
Topic:
Processes in the Criminal Justice System: Sentencing
Essay Instructions:
This assignment is designed to recognize and evaluate your understanding of the material covered in this module. Your work will be assessed for demonstrated critical thinking, analytical and communication skills. Read the instructions carefully and present your response in a clear and organized fashion.
Questions
The essence of a judicial system in an open, fair, and just society should be its impartiality. Indeed, we have heard it said, “Justice is blind”. However, the figures regarding the disproportionate number of racialized persons living lives of incarceration in the U.S. are staggering.
• Is the judicial system to blame, or is the judicial system merely the end of the road for people whose lives lead them on a steady, almost direct, path to the courthouse – and then the jailhouse – door? Are the courts responding to a public opinion that stereotypes people of color as prone to crime? As these questions are contemplated, one overarching question emerges: Does the judicial process in the U.S. result in racial discrimination?
• How might public policy help ameliorate the plight of a perceived “subculture” of society, i.e. the disproportionate number of racial and ethnic minorities who fall victim to ‘the system’? Consider such procedures as bail, fines, warrants for failure to appear, the right to counsel, plea bargaining, jury selection and sentencing. Cite examples from the Ferguson report and other readings.
You should address these questions in a paper of approximately 2,400 words, relying primarily on the readings and other materials. You may include independent sources. All information should be documented in MLA style.
Essay Sample Content Preview:
Student's Name
Professor's Name
Course
Date
Introduction
Sentencing is considered one of the final stages in the criminal justice process. The criminal justice process in the United States is, in many ways, inclined towards incarceration. According to Gabbidon et al., sentencing involves sanctions that an individual faces upon conviction for committing a crime (179). Furthermore, there has been a staggering increase in incarcerated individuals over the past four decades. Consequently, citizens and social scientists continue to scrutinize the role of the courts in a large number of incarcerated individuals in the United States. Therefore, to understand the role of courts, it is critical to narrow it down to different significant stages in the trial process. Moreover, sentencing is one of the most consequential stages in the criminal justice process. According to Gabbidon et al., judges have discretion during sentencing processes in many instances (181). Even though other stakeholders such as the legislature play a critical role in sentencing, the mandate and discretion of judges cannot be underestimated. The legislature has an oversight role in sentencing, such as stipulating guidelines and limiting disparities that may arise in the process.
Part I
It could be argued that people subjected to the criminal justice system stare increasingly high chances of landing in prisons and jails due to the sentencing philosophy in the United States. Understanding the sentencing philosophy requires the assessment of the history of sentencing right from colonial times. The sentencing philosophy has continued to change due to prevailing dynamic circumstances. According to Gabbidon et al., there are four primary sentencing philosophies: retribution, treatment or rehabilitation, incapacitation, and deterrence (180). Furthermore, the choice of every philosophy could be influenced by socio-political aspects. For example, in the post-civil rights movement period, America inclined more towards using a more liberal sentencing philosophy that favors rehabilitation. However, the country experienced a rapid rise in crime in the 70s, thereby resulting in a radical change in the sentencing philosophy. As a result of rising crime cases in the country, a vast majority of the American population favors conservative sentencing philosophy, which entails deterrence and punishment. The conservative philosophy has been widely used since the 1980s. One of the effects of using conservative sentencing philosophy is the apparent rise in the number of individuals sent to jails and prisons.
Gabbidon et al. outline that a study conducted in 2006 indicated that the average sentence term in state courts was four years and eleven months (193). Furthermore, most respondents favored the conservative sentencing philosophy when asked whether they would choose jail deterrence and long sentences or rehabilitation and shorter sentences. The sentencing philosophy widely applied in the United States is not solely an idea of the court. The legislature has a primary duty of prescribing guidelines that can help equalize and limit the disparities that may occur in sentencing. A conservative sentencing philosophy could be mainly attributed to the legislature due to its role. By extension, the philosophy could also be considered to be an establishment of the American people as the legislature acts on behalf of the citizens through the exercise of indirect democracy.
Additionally, to a bit of extent, it could be argued that public opinion influences courts that stereotype racial minorities in the United States. A study conducted by Spohn (2000) revealed that people of color were subjected to more harsh sentences than their white counterparts (Gabbidon et al.,190). For example, young males, unemployed African Americans, African Americans who were unemployed and male, had lower incomes and had less education were victims of harsh court sentencing. Based on the study, one could argue that the stereotypes within society influenced the courts. Furthermore, a study conducted by Zatz even revealed more glaring instances of stereotypes in court sentencing, especially between 1930 to 1960. As a result of such stereotypes, racial minorities like African Americans fell victims to considerably harsh sentencing. Such stereotypes could be traced to the days of slavery hundreds of years back. The history of slavery in the United States has continued to haunt the country hundreds of years later despite considerable progress that has been made in creating a more just society and safeguarding the rights and liberties of the American people. The deliberate attempts to safeguard such rights and liberties have not been devoid of setbacks. For example, Jim Crow, which established the separate but equal idea, created an ever-widening gap between whites and people of color. Furthermore, it led to the creation of many stereotypes to promote systemic racism.
Regarding racial discrimination, the judicial system does not expressly depict instances of racial discrimination. Even though judges have discretion in sentencing, their decisions are subject to scrutiny by the citizens and interest groups drawn from different quarters. Such scrutiny is one of the ways through which the courts help accountable for their decisions hence making it difficult to have instances of blatant discrimination. Furthermore, the judicial system provides parties the opportunity of appealing judgments. The decisions made in lower courts can be challenged in higher courts, making it difficult for racial discrimination to occur. For example, decisions made in state courts can find their way to federal courts on grounds such as racial discrimination in judgments due to the existence of progressive laws such as the 14th Amendment. However, the courts have been in the spotlight over the existence of other variables which result in biased sentencing. According to Gabbidon et al., sentencing is a culmination of a trial process that involves different processes at the carious stage (180). Therefore, flaws at any stage affect the merit of the judgment and the sentencing.
For instance, there have been concerns over the years about jury selection. According to Gabbidon et al., jurists play a significant role in the trial, judgment, and sentencing (166). The representation of people drawn from different cultural and racial backgrounds is vital as it influences the outcome of a trial. One of the challenges that have continued to rock jury selection processes is the lack of confidence by prosecutors and attorneys in prospective jurors of color. Gabbidon, Shaun, and Helen (166) assert that preemptive justice is one of the grounds upon which prospective jurors of color do not get consideration. For example, such individuals could argue that they do not have confidence in such jurors' decisions due to a lack of experience in such processes. Also, there have been concerns about how plea bargain is conducted in both federal and state courts. According to Gabbidon et al., white offenders have generally benefitted from plea bargains compared to people of color (164). For exam...
Professor's Name
Course
Date
Introduction
Sentencing is considered one of the final stages in the criminal justice process. The criminal justice process in the United States is, in many ways, inclined towards incarceration. According to Gabbidon et al., sentencing involves sanctions that an individual faces upon conviction for committing a crime (179). Furthermore, there has been a staggering increase in incarcerated individuals over the past four decades. Consequently, citizens and social scientists continue to scrutinize the role of the courts in a large number of incarcerated individuals in the United States. Therefore, to understand the role of courts, it is critical to narrow it down to different significant stages in the trial process. Moreover, sentencing is one of the most consequential stages in the criminal justice process. According to Gabbidon et al., judges have discretion during sentencing processes in many instances (181). Even though other stakeholders such as the legislature play a critical role in sentencing, the mandate and discretion of judges cannot be underestimated. The legislature has an oversight role in sentencing, such as stipulating guidelines and limiting disparities that may arise in the process.
Part I
It could be argued that people subjected to the criminal justice system stare increasingly high chances of landing in prisons and jails due to the sentencing philosophy in the United States. Understanding the sentencing philosophy requires the assessment of the history of sentencing right from colonial times. The sentencing philosophy has continued to change due to prevailing dynamic circumstances. According to Gabbidon et al., there are four primary sentencing philosophies: retribution, treatment or rehabilitation, incapacitation, and deterrence (180). Furthermore, the choice of every philosophy could be influenced by socio-political aspects. For example, in the post-civil rights movement period, America inclined more towards using a more liberal sentencing philosophy that favors rehabilitation. However, the country experienced a rapid rise in crime in the 70s, thereby resulting in a radical change in the sentencing philosophy. As a result of rising crime cases in the country, a vast majority of the American population favors conservative sentencing philosophy, which entails deterrence and punishment. The conservative philosophy has been widely used since the 1980s. One of the effects of using conservative sentencing philosophy is the apparent rise in the number of individuals sent to jails and prisons.
Gabbidon et al. outline that a study conducted in 2006 indicated that the average sentence term in state courts was four years and eleven months (193). Furthermore, most respondents favored the conservative sentencing philosophy when asked whether they would choose jail deterrence and long sentences or rehabilitation and shorter sentences. The sentencing philosophy widely applied in the United States is not solely an idea of the court. The legislature has a primary duty of prescribing guidelines that can help equalize and limit the disparities that may occur in sentencing. A conservative sentencing philosophy could be mainly attributed to the legislature due to its role. By extension, the philosophy could also be considered to be an establishment of the American people as the legislature acts on behalf of the citizens through the exercise of indirect democracy.
Additionally, to a bit of extent, it could be argued that public opinion influences courts that stereotype racial minorities in the United States. A study conducted by Spohn (2000) revealed that people of color were subjected to more harsh sentences than their white counterparts (Gabbidon et al.,190). For example, young males, unemployed African Americans, African Americans who were unemployed and male, had lower incomes and had less education were victims of harsh court sentencing. Based on the study, one could argue that the stereotypes within society influenced the courts. Furthermore, a study conducted by Zatz even revealed more glaring instances of stereotypes in court sentencing, especially between 1930 to 1960. As a result of such stereotypes, racial minorities like African Americans fell victims to considerably harsh sentencing. Such stereotypes could be traced to the days of slavery hundreds of years back. The history of slavery in the United States has continued to haunt the country hundreds of years later despite considerable progress that has been made in creating a more just society and safeguarding the rights and liberties of the American people. The deliberate attempts to safeguard such rights and liberties have not been devoid of setbacks. For example, Jim Crow, which established the separate but equal idea, created an ever-widening gap between whites and people of color. Furthermore, it led to the creation of many stereotypes to promote systemic racism.
Regarding racial discrimination, the judicial system does not expressly depict instances of racial discrimination. Even though judges have discretion in sentencing, their decisions are subject to scrutiny by the citizens and interest groups drawn from different quarters. Such scrutiny is one of the ways through which the courts help accountable for their decisions hence making it difficult to have instances of blatant discrimination. Furthermore, the judicial system provides parties the opportunity of appealing judgments. The decisions made in lower courts can be challenged in higher courts, making it difficult for racial discrimination to occur. For example, decisions made in state courts can find their way to federal courts on grounds such as racial discrimination in judgments due to the existence of progressive laws such as the 14th Amendment. However, the courts have been in the spotlight over the existence of other variables which result in biased sentencing. According to Gabbidon et al., sentencing is a culmination of a trial process that involves different processes at the carious stage (180). Therefore, flaws at any stage affect the merit of the judgment and the sentencing.
For instance, there have been concerns over the years about jury selection. According to Gabbidon et al., jurists play a significant role in the trial, judgment, and sentencing (166). The representation of people drawn from different cultural and racial backgrounds is vital as it influences the outcome of a trial. One of the challenges that have continued to rock jury selection processes is the lack of confidence by prosecutors and attorneys in prospective jurors of color. Gabbidon, Shaun, and Helen (166) assert that preemptive justice is one of the grounds upon which prospective jurors of color do not get consideration. For example, such individuals could argue that they do not have confidence in such jurors' decisions due to a lack of experience in such processes. Also, there have been concerns about how plea bargain is conducted in both federal and state courts. According to Gabbidon et al., white offenders have generally benefitted from plea bargains compared to people of color (164). For exam...
Get the Whole Paper!
Not exactly what you need?
Do you need a custom essay? Order right now: