Research Paper: Corrections, Sentencing, Imprisonment, and Death Penalty Assignment

Corrections, Sentencing, Imprisonment, and the Death Penalty: A Comprehensive Analysis and Recommendations Name of Student Course Name of Professor University Date Corrections, Sentencing, Imprisonment, and the Death Penalty: A Comprehensive Analysis and Recommendations The criminal justice system in the United States is a complex system comprised of processes and institutions meant to handle criminal events, including corrections, sentencing, imprisonment, and the highly debated subject of the death penalty. This paper examines these topics in greater detail, highlighting essential issues and offering recommendations for improvement. In addition, it includes a Christian perspective to highlight the ethical and moral principles involved in such matters. Pivotal to this conversation is the question of disparity in the duration of prison terms for various offenders, which is a clear manifestation of prejudice and unfair treatment by the justice system. Furthermore, the concept and the role of imprisonment are also elucidated regarding its goal and effectiveness in rehabilitating offenders, deterring others from crime, or simply punishing them (Mayeux, 2018). Another significant issue analyzed in this paper is the discriminatory use of the death penalty when it comes to race, which ultimately brings into question the very principles of equity and justice within judicial systems. Lastly, the paper assesses the effectiveness and the moral issue of capital punishment and discusses it in the light of the concept of Christian ethics. By analyzing these pertinent problems through the lens of Christian ethics and ethical reasoning, this paper will provide the ongoing discourse on criminal justice reform, seeking a solution that is just, merciful, and beneficial to society. Sentencing: Disparities and Guidelines Sentencing Decisions Punishment decision-making is an essential stage in the criminal justice process that establishes the life prospects of persons who have been convicted. It involves weighing several factors, such as the offense’s type and seriousness, the offender’s past criminal record, and other factors around the commission of the crime (Costanzo & Krauss, 2021). The studies show that the perception of these elements plays the most crucial role in sentencing. Criminal acts committed due to factors within the individual, over which they have control and are relatively stable, elicit more severe punishment than strict rehabilitation (Robinson & Darley, 1997). On the other hand, offenses believed to have roots in more global and less easily manageable and stable factors might attract less severe punishments with more focus on reforming and reintegrating the offender into society. Sentencing Disparities There have been attempts to provide reforms to guide the judges in reducing disparities within the system, but this challenge remains rife. Such disparities may be caused by factors like race, gender, and the economic status of the individuals involved (Costanzo & Krauss, 2021). Research shows that Hispanic and Black people, especially young men, get longer prison sentences than their White counterparts for similar crimes. Also, gender has shown differences where women tend to be punished differently for drug and property offenses than for violent crimes, which are equal to men’s imprisonment rates but for shorter periods (Lehmann et al., 2017). It is evidenced by such disparities, thus pointing to the fact that the decision-making process expected to be carried out by impartial judges relies so much on the subjective discretion of the judge. Sentencing Guidelines As a result of the above differences, states, jurisdictions, and the federal government have adopted the use of sentencing guidelines. These guidelines are meant to prescribe procedures for sentencing by illustrating specific considerations, including the type of offense and the defendant’s prior record (Costanzo & Krauss, 2021). However, such guidelines present no one set that all judges are willing to embrace, given that most are guides rather than requirements. The federal sentencing guidelines, which ensured equal treatment for every defendant, were struck down in United States v. Booker (2005), making the guidelines advisory so as not to encroach on the judicial discretions (Yang, 2013). In addition, with the increase of various mandatory minimum sentencing laws in certain jurisdictions, inequalities are likely to be worsened as the options for judicial discretion are reduced, and the negative impacts of these laws have been observed to affect minorities and low-income earners disproportionately. These laws set practices where certain offenses will be punished with a minimum requisite time of imprisonment, thereby limiting the judiciary’s discretion in passing punishment based on circumstances. As a result, the efficiency and equity of the penalty procedures are still in question, and many discussions and reforms regarding criminal justice have been launched. Imprisonment: Goals and Issues Types of Imprisonment Prisons and jails are a broad category of confinement environments that are used for different functions in the criminal justice system. Jails serve as temporary detention centers where suspects remain detained or individuals who receive minor penalties or are sentenced to short terms (Costanzo & Krauss, 2021). On the other hand, state and federal prisons confine people found guilty of more severe offenses for an extended period to limit escape and provide corrective measures (Esser, 2024). Supermax is the most cutting-edge variant, initially intended for housing those criminals who are most dangerous and who must be isolated from other people for most of the time. Thus, each type of facility brings certain problems and has some specific functions that make the system of imprisonment rather diverse. Goals of Imprisonment It is crucial to understand that imprisonment has several goals reflecting general principles of punishment and the overall goals of the criminal justice system. Incapacitation helps in the protection of society from violent offenders by denying them access to people by detaining them. Deterrence operates on two levels: specific deterrence focuses on discouraging the offender from repeating the same criminal act because they are now being punished by imprisonment. In contrast, general deterrence focuses on preventing any other person from engaging in the same criminal act by threatening them with punishment through imprisonment. Retribution and justice entail punitive measures corresponding to the crime’s severity to meet society’s thirst for vengeance (Costanzo & Krauss, 2021). Rehabilitation appears to be an unattainable concept that focuses on changing the offenders through education, vocational training, and psychological treatments to reintroduce them to society with acceptable behavior and conform to the laws of the land. However, as these goals have been articulated, the experience of a prisoner’s daily life works against rehabilitation. It is not uncommon to find prisons with problems like overcrowding, poor inmate health care, and violence within these institutions, all of which do not support the change process but exacerbate the cycle of recidivism. Bringing street culture into prisons aggravates challenges of stability and successful reform among the prisoners. Prisoner Rights and the Role of the Courts The nations’ judicial systems have greatly influenced the change in prisoner rights. The nations’ judicial systems have dramatically influenced the shift in prisoner rights in the past decades. In the past, the courts limited interference with the prison administr...