Determinate vs. Indeterminate Sentencing
Sentencing is a fundamental stage in the of the criminal justice process. After the trial process is complete and the defendant has been found guilty the court will impose the penalty. The basic goals of modern sentencing are retribution, incapacitation, deterrence, rehabilitation and restoration. These goals are achieved by different sentencing practices which are indeterminate and determinate sentencing. This essay will compare indeterminate and determinate sentencing; outline the pros and cons of each sentencing model while providing two examples of each.
Indeterminate sentencing is a form of “criminal punishment that encourages rehabilitation through the use of general and relatively unspecific
…show more content…
Determinate sentencing can reduce bias of judges and juries adding consistency to sentencing. The predetermined sentence, if found guilty for an offender, is solely based off of the crime and not the race, religion or identity. This consistency, however, doesn’t allow any discretion for judges to impose sentences based off of the circumstances of the crime. The problem with determinate sentencing is that the offender would serve his or her entire sentence. This meaning the offender would not be released until the sentence that was imposed was carried out. This “definite sentence” doesn’t assist the offender in rehabilitation. Determinate sentencing doesn’t give incentive for good behavior (Castillo, 2013). An advantage of determinate sentencing is this is a standard deterrence for a crime. If you commit a crime you know what the consequences of those actions will be. You will serve the full amount of time for the act. It does not waiver if you plead guilty or are determined guilty. Determinate sentencing impacts prison overpopulation because, it “does not allow an inmate to be eligible for parole, until at least 85% of the prison term has been served” (Mudaliar, 2015). This causes stress for the correctional staff and can increase violence inside the