Egregious Sentencing Case Study

Judges often have the responsibility of sentencing an offender once guilt is determined. While judges have flexibility in deciding a sentence, their powers are limited to prevent egregious sentences. Multiple factors impact judge’s decisions on sentencing, several are the Eighth Amendment, statutory provisions, philosophical rationales, organizational considerations, presentence investigation reports, and the judge’s personal characteristics (Bohm & Haley, 2011). First, through the Bill of Rights, the Eighth Amendment protects individuals from cruel and unusual punishments (Bohm & Haley, 2011). Punishments must proportionately fit the crime or justice has failed and not fairly been served. Sentences should both reflect the sentences for

Judges then must determine which type of punishment or combination of punishments to evoke from the five available: “fines, probation, intermediate punishment, imprisonment, and death” (Bohm & Haley, pp. 322, 2011). The offenses statute allows a sentence to be chosen from a specific range for each class of offenses. Thus, a judge could decide on highest possible fine and the minimum amount of time to be served or vice versa. Such freedom in judgment allows for custom sentencing to appropriately match the crime. Sentence lengths are further affected by the state law in regard to indeterminate sentencing, setting mandatory minimum and maximums, or determinate sentencing, a set amount of incarceration time. Determinate sentencing is further dissected into the categories of flat-time sentencing, mandatory sentencing, and presumptive sentencing. Offenders serve the exact sentence when flat-time sentencing is used, the sentence remains unaffected by other factors. Mandatory sentencing is set by statutes demanding that a minimum amount of time must be served before an offender becomes eligible for release. While presumptive sentencing is determined by statute other factors may increase the amount of time normally predetermined for an

What exactly does the judge wish to accomplish with a sentence? Various motives exist such as retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation, and restoration (Bohm & Haley, 2011). Retribution is the most primal of the rationales, embodying the belief that wrongdoers deserve to have an equal amount of punishment in return to account for what they have done. The simple mindset of revenge is what motivates the rationale of retribution. However, incapacitation is more oriented to protecting society from further harm by separating the offender from the public. Likewise, a deterrence rationale seeks to protect society by attempting to prevent either the offender from committing similar misdeeds in the future or discouraging similar behavior from others. Moreover, by embracing a rationale of rehabilitation a judge believes that an offender, through undergoing certain tasks, may once again function as a member of society. Lastly, the restoration rationale solely focuses on attempting to make a victim or society whole, as they were before the