Institutional Affiliation Issues in Sentencing Guidelines - Law Paper Example

Sentencing guidelines act as the primary tools used by both judges and magistrates to determine the kind of a sentence that a criminal should be handed. As such, these guidelines are comprised of different issues which help these judges and magistrates to make the right decisions. Without the various components of guidelines, judges would end up sentencing people who are not guilty. One of the important aspects of these issues is that they have been changing over the past 50 years (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). This is because the number of crimes reported in the United States of America continues to decrease and as a result, sentencing guidelines have to change so as to accommodate these crimes. Shown below is a graph showing how crimes in the United States have been recorded over the past few years;

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Order now

Figure 1: Rate of crimes decreasing from the year 1991-2013. https://www.conservativereview.com/commentary/2016/05/busted-the-10-most-dangerous-myths-about-criminal-justice-reform#sthash.lUSXFhbP.dpuf

The figure above shows the decreasing number of crimes which has resulted in different issues in sentencing guidelines changing constantly. Some of matters in sentencing guidelines are discussed below;

Priorities- according to sentencing guidelines, priorities are always considered first. Therefore, the case that is deemed to have the highest priority is taken care of first followed by other situations based on their preferences (Frase, 2005). Evolution of sentencing guidelines has occurred in such a way that in the past, some cases were not given any time. These cases were considered to be of low priority and as a result could be resolved personally among individuals (Breyer, 1988). Priorities in sentencing guidelines have changed in such a way that any citizen of the United States having a case that requires sentencing is taken care of in the courts (Frase, 2005).

Research- investigation is an important part of any sentencing guidelines. Through investigation is carried out on cases which are considered to be serious (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). Research is similar to priorities in such a way that more serious cases are offered more time in terms of investigation (Frase, 2005). Changes in technology have affected research in most cases in such a way that investigation can nowadays be carried out efficiently. Through the use of modern equipment such as fingerprint kit and trajectory kit, the investigation has improved by a great deal (Breyer, 1988).

Consultation- this is an important aspect of sentencing guidelines. Both judges and magistrates have to consult experts, particularly professionals who deal with criminal justice before making any judgement in any case. Consultation is given as much time as possible and the reasonable time is considered to be 12 weeks (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). Within this period, evidence can be reviewed, and a sentence can be made on the offender. This avoids the chances of sentencing a guilty individual (Frase, 2005).

Publication- another issue that has been changing over the past 50 years about sentencing guidelines is publication. Some cases in the past used to be taken care of privately away from the public (Frase, 2005). However, nowadays, all cases are made public so that any citizen willing to participate can do so willingly. Publication has also changed in such a way that nowadays, cases are made public through different means such as the internet and the media (Breyer, 1988).

Evolution of sentencing guidelines over the past 50 years

While reviewing the research of sentencing guidelines, the United States has been used as an example in this case. Different perspectives have been over the past 50 years to study how these guidelines have been changing (Koln & Stith, 1993). One of the perspectives is the institutional viewpoint. In the past, crimes used to be solved using a straightforward method (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). Offenders used to be tried, and the judgement was either death or freedom by a group of juries who were referred to as de facto. If an offender was found guilty, the sentence used to be death without any negotiation. However, if the perpetrator were not guilty, he would be offered freedom. Punishment by a few years in jail was not a common occurrence especially in more serious crimes such as capital offenses (Frase, 2005). As a result, the public opinion saw the need to intervene because some individuals used to be judged unfairly. Hanging used to be a common occurrence during these periods and it was one of the reasons why reforms in sentencing guidelines had to be introduced. With these improvements, serious offenses such as the capital crimes could be handed other sentences apart from punishment by death.

One of the reasons why only a few offenses were handed punishment by some years is because during these periods, particularly before the American independence, only a few prisons existed (Breyer, 1988). As a result, severe sentences were being handed to offenders, in case they were found guilty of any charge. Professionals in the past were required to act as judges (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). Sentences were being handed based on few evidence, and as a result, juries who had enough experience were required to undergo the sentencing guidelines during these periods. It was a common practice to pick juries from individuals with property, and this was one of the weaknesses in selecting judges. Rather than focusing entirely on education and experience, property used to play a part in choosing these individuals who were to specialize on sentencing guidelines (Frase, 2005).

Another change that is common in the modern jury concerning sentencing guidelines is that they have to explain the reasons for their verdict. The sentence given for any crime has to be supported by facts unlike in the past 50 years (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). During this time, judges were free to make decisions and not provide facts or the law followed in making their decisions (Koln & Stith, 1993). Once they felt that there was no enough evidence for a particular crime, they would write it off and consider the offender not guilty. Improved technology can be deemed to have played a big part in this change. For a judge or a magistrate to make a sentence on any crime, a thorough investigation has to be carried out, and enough proof that the offender is guilty must be presented (Frase, 2005). The number of punishments that were available according to the sentencing guidelines also played a part in determining whether the jury gave a reason for their judgement or not. As explained earlier, the sentence was either punishment by death or freedom in the past, but in the modern days, some punishment options exist.

Sentencing outcomes have continued to improve with time due to the presence of increased prisons and reformatories. With the increased number of these institutions, judges have acquired the freedom to give a broad range sentences apart from death and freedom (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). Time has been a key factor since its one of the reasons why more penitentiaries have continued to be developed. The introduction of judges has also changed the sentencing guidelines since the work of making judgements was left to the jury. Judges are nowadays tasked with providing sentences unlike in the past where the jury performed all the work. Ever since this introduction, the jury has continued to be passive because they are not involved so much when sentences are being given (Frase, 2005).

Reviewing of sentences was also not a common practice in the past. Once the jury provided penalties, it was the final decision, and nothing could be done about it. This shows the power that the jury had and also how people used to be discriminated in the past. The introduction of the twentieth century has brought about the case whereby sentences can be reviewed before and after they have been given by the judges (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). Through this process, the offender is given enough time to determine whether he or she is guilty or not. Judges and magistrates are considered to be sentencing experts, and as a result, they are required to acquire a complete understanding of the sentencing guidelines. The standards of recent sentencing are considered to be high compared to the past due to this review (Koln & Stith, 1993).

Due to the requirement to reform the system that was previously used in the United States of America in providing sentences, the government of this nation has introduced sentencing guidelines. These guidelines were followed by some states while there were still some states in this country that were willing to continue with the old system. All states have adopted the introduction of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines in the United States of America, and these guidelines are used in the modern constitution of this nation (Koln & Stith, 1993).

Sentencing guidelines have also changed in the past 50 years in that it has affected the number of criminal cases over these years. As reported by the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the number of sentences to prisons between the year 1960-1980 increased considerably (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). This is due to the growing number of criminal cases that occurred during this period. The rate at which imprisonment grew during this time was estimated to be around 8 percent. Offenders involved in criminal and drug cases were undergoing heavy sentences as decided by the public policy together with the agreement of the members of the government during this period (Frase, 2005). The heavy sentences were meant to discourage criminals from being involved in illegal practices (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). However, during the twenty-first century, the sentencing guidelines had taken effect in the United States of America, and the number of imprisonment cases had reduced considerably.

The manner in which sentencing guidelines has changed over the past 50 years can also be seen in other different places such as in Europe, where the Council of Europe records it. Internationally, imprisonment histories are recorded by a body referred to as International Center for Prison Studies (Frase, 2005). These bodies are meant to record and uphold serious cases that occur internationally, and sentencing is a section of criminal justice reform that is followed carefully in this body (Koln & Stith, 1993). In 2009, United States of America was recorded to have the most imprisonment cases in the world, which were recorded to account for 23 percent of the entire worlds incarceration cases (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). This shows the problems that are being faced by this country regarding imprisonment cases.

Sentencing guidelines have been followed carefully internationally by most countries in the world. One of the reasons why some countries do not have a stable government is because they have a history of weak sentencing guidelines in their governance. Due to this ruling, criminals have been encouraged to engage themselves in illegal activities since the punishment is fair to them. Over the past 50 years, most people have emphasized the need to have a strong sentencing rule so as to protect most citizens.

Relevance of Sentencing Guidelines Reform to Public Policy Making

During the period between the 1970s to 1980s, the rate of criminal activities was on the rise in the United States of America (Redburn, Travis & Western, 2014). This rise played a big part in the decision by the policy makers to introduce severe prison sentences in an attempt to cub the rise. Drugs were also a major threat to this nation, and immediate action had to be carried out. Reforms made in the sentencing guidelines particularly...