The criminal justice system Research Essay

In an effort to comprehend the best ways to sentence criminal convicts, the criminal justice system has undergone a number of changes and reforms over the past few decades. The most common sentencing models across all jurisdictions are indeterminate and determinate. Due to the differences in their features, these two models are favored by different states.

A fixed prison term under a determinate sentencing plan is not open to review by the parole board or other criminal justice organizations. (Johnson & Sterling, 2014). Notably, this approach comes with a number of benefits and drawbacks. This model is also preferred by those states that do not consider reducing jail term for short-term convicts as a solution to their crimes. The model suggests that sentences such as incarceration should be set as fixed with no room for a reduced jail term. This includes periods when convicts are waiting for their judgment. In 1970’s before there were reforms regarding the sentencing, the jail term was reducible depending on the behavior of the inmates early before their release term was over.

Before the reforms were instituted in the criminal justice, the determinate model allowed states to delegate the roles of determining the eligibility of the inmates to benefit from the reduced jail term once they had achieved one-quarter of their term. They thought that this method was meant to encourage the behavior of the inmates, in fact, it was referred as “good-time credit”(Johnson & Sterling, 2014). Well behaved inmates enjoyed reduced jail term whereas the rest had to serve all their jail term. However, the changes in the criminal justice saw this benefits scrapped from the justice system. They were replaced by the Truth-in-Sentencing regulations that emphasized that inmates had to serve all their jail term before they were released (Johnson & Sterling, 2014).

Notably, the 1994 Violent Crime Control and Enforcement laws suggested that inmates should be released once they have completed more than eighty percent of their jail term. This law was received with mixed feelings by the members of the public. They are those who argued that definite jail term led to overcrowding of jails, separation of families and in some cases creation of a sense of hopelessness among people. Furthermore, there are those who argued that definite jail terms create a careless attitude among inmates.

Determinate model has both pros and cons. For instance, this mode of sentencing does not promote supervision once the convict is released from the prisons. The prisoners are assumed to have reformed after they have served their jail term. However, there are high chances that these convicts will repeat their previous mistakes if they are not supervised (Laufer, 2017). For instance, in the year 2010 when the legislatures passed the sentencing bill, more than two hundred and fifty prisons were released from the prisons (Laufer, 2017). Most of these people were sexual criminals whereas others were under false imprisonment. The release of the prisoners is a security risk to people in the community. Therefore, the determinate model cannot be considered as a solution to the sentencing problem unless further changes are made to reduce these criminal justice loopholes.

Indeterminate Sentencing Model

This is a model that consists of a wide range of years of up to twenty years. It has a minimum period that can be reduced by credits earned by the inmates. However, if there is a release date for the convict, it is always uncertain based on their progress. The uncertainty is also based on the period the parole board with be taking to review the case. This means that the release date solely lies in the hands of the board since they hold several hearings to establish the most appropriate date the convicted person with be eligible for the release.

One assumption of this model is that different people take various timeline to reform. The underlying principle is that the model acknowledges that the prison can rehabilitate some of the offenders whereas other will take longer time to rehabilitate. The determinate model argues that releasing prisoners before they are reformed is a major risk to the security of the community. The indeterminate model solves this problem since it argues that releasing prisons earlier before they are reformed is unacceptable and thus the parole board to determine their eligibility.

An indeterminate model shows a positive response from the inmates. In this sentencing model, an inmate who shows the most progress is rewarded with a minimum term. The parole ensures that those with the least progress are not summoned for the hearings. However, the progress of the offenders is not considered as a simple process but rather a careful evaluation is carried out to ascertain that they have reformed.

Despite all the benefits achieved by the indeterminate model, it is evident that a lot of power is given to the parole board. These leads to the question of whether the board is subject to discriminatory and arbitrary acts. There are claims that prisoners from the minority groups and those without connection receive harsh decisions from the board (Rengifo & Stemen, 2015).

References

Johnson, J. A., & Sterling, R. V. (2014). Determinate Sentencing. The Encyclopedia of Criminology and Criminal Justice.

Laufer, W. (2017). The criminology of criminal law. Routledge.

Rengifo, A. F., & Stemen, D. (2015). The unintended effects of penal reform: African American presence, incarceration, and the abolition of discretionary parole in the United States. Crime & Delinquency, 61(5), 719-741.