Suspended Prison Sentences in Czechia: How They Came to Dominate the Penal Landscape and Their Consequences

Legislatures often require a specific or minimal sentence be imposed if certain conditions are fulfilled. This study shows how such rules might benefit defendants. Israeli law requires that a suspended prison sentence be activated if the offender is reconvicted of a further offense during the term of suspension. Hence, the suspended sentence becomes a sort of minimum sentence for a breach offense. Yet judges are allowed to prolong the suspended term if, among other things, the breach offense is minor and hence does not result in a prison sentence. Using propensity score matching to analyze a rich database of magistrate court cases, we find that courts use the exception much more often than expected and, more importantly, that judges refrain from sentencing breaching defendants to prison, even if the breach offense justifies imprisonment, in order to circumvent the requirement to activate the suspended sentence. Moreover, for severe offenses, courts are less likely to sentence an offender to prison if the offender is in breach of a suspended sentence, compared to a similar offender who is not in such breach. For such offenses, being in breach of a suspended sentence reduces the likelihood of a prison sentence. For some offenders, the suspended sentence thus becomes a benefit rather than a punishment.

The article treats the evolution of the system of criminal punishment in the Czech Republic and selected European countries, the main focus being on the issue of alternative sentencing. The first part of the text brings forward the need of a balanced application of the two antithetical criminal policies that currently influence the penal system. On the one hand there is an effort to limit the unconditional prison sentence and to introduce various forms of alternatives to imprisonment; on the other hand, however, there is a call for more severe criminal sanctions. The second part of the text analyses the origins of the approach that has lead to the introduction of alternative sentencing in Europe and describes the main trends in that criminal policy in the first half of the 20th century and its new dimensions since the 1980s. The analysis implies that the effort focused on the restriction of unconditional imprisonment has had a central position within the criminal policies of European countries, a trend that is to be further developed. The claims on a more intense penal repression should be considered only in terms of a s mail group of the most serious crimes. The third part of the text deals with the penal systems of Germany, France and Finland and their practical application. The best approved type of sentence in these countries is the pecuniary punishment followed by the suspended sentence and, to some extent, the community service. The fourth part analyses the development of alternative criminal sanctions in former Czechoslovakia between 1918 and 1989 concluding that the dominant type of sanction with a historical tradition was the suspended prison sentence. The legal provisions, however, were rather unsubstantial and not detailed enough. The pecuniary punishment was applied only rarely in that period, a fact that only corresponded with a primitive legal regulation of that type of sanction. The fifth part contains an overview of legal reforms in the Czech criminal law that have taken place since 1989 in order to achieve a penal system that would live up to European standards. The contemporary judicial practice, analysed in the final part of the text, has achieved a considerable drop in the number of unconditional prison sentences, although the structure of alternative criminal sanctions is still not satisfactory. The recommendation is to both improve the legal regulation of the existing alternative sanctions and to amend the penal system with new forms of sanctions that would reduce the detention character of imprisonment.

This article examines the effects of custodial versus non-custodial sentences on recidivism. An eight-year follow-up study was conducted to track and compare rates of recidivism between former prisoners and offenders who had served a suspended prison sentence. Drawing upon a representative sample of 483 offenders sentenced in 1998 by the Criminal Courts of Barcelona, two subpopulations of offenders were selected. The first group consisted of offenders who were sentenced to prison ( n = 179) and the comparison group was composed of those who were given a suspended prison sentence ( n = 304). After controlling for other risk factors predictive of recidivism, logistic regression techniques were used to examine whether the variable ‘type of sanction’ (prison or suspended prison sentence) predicts reconviction rates. The analysis revealed that the offenders given suspended sentences had a lower risk of reconviction than those given custodial sentences. The findings provide evidence that alternatives to custody are more effective than imprisonment in reducing recidivism. Finally, the article discusses how these findings relate to labelling and specific deterrence theories that make contradictory claims regarding the effects of imprisonment on recidivism.

In the Netherlands, suspended sentences are increasingly imposed as alternatives to short-term imprisonment in an attempt to reduce recidivism. However, little research has been done to examine recidivism outcomes after suspended sentences. This study used official data on adult offenders sentenced to either fully suspended prison sentences or short-term imprisonment in the court districts of Amsterdam and The Hague ( n = 2115). Using propensity score matching, no significant differences in the risk of reconviction between the two sentences were found. Regarding criminal history, first offenders given fully suspended prison sentences had a higher risk of being reconvicted than first offenders sentenced to short-term imprisonment. In contrast, recidivists sentenced to short-term imprisonment had a higher risk of being reconvicted.

A 21 year old woman in Northern Ireland who bought pills on the internet to induce a miscarriage has been given a three month suspended prison sentence. The woman, whose...

A Dutch hospital neurologist has been given a three month suspended prison sentence after he left instructions to give an increasingly large dose of morphine to a terminally ill 63 year old man in a coma. He then left for the weekend. Nursing staff were left in “great uncertainty,” and the patient died the next day. The Hague district court rejected a defence under the euthanasia laws and found the doctor, referred to as RG, guilty of the “premeditated ending” of his patient's life. The sentence is one of the most severe imposed on a doctor in a case of euthanasia and is being viewed as a signal to the profession. The inspectorate of public …

The position of the custody threshold and the proportion of cases passing it are crucial for any attempt to reduce imprisonment. The article focuses on the sentencing threshold(s) in Germany, a country that shows relatively low incarceration rates in international comparison. This is in part due to legislation that aims to replace short prison sentences, especially those below six months, by fines, and unsuspended prison sentences up to two years by suspended ones. These provisions are widely applied in practice, yet not always in accordance with the letter of the law. The article will give an overview of the legal and practical aspects of decision-making between fines and prison sentences and between suspended and unsuspended sentences in Germany. It will show that there is not only one sentencing threshold identifiable in practice, but two different ones: firstly, between fines and suspended sentences, and secondly, between suspended and unsuspended sentences. Problems of the German system are identified, among which are the convertability of day fines into suspended and unsuspended prison terms and the treatment of persistent recidivists. Finally, possible solutions are proposed.

The general picture of sentences pronounced by the courts is affected by the visible differences in the structure of offences comitted by men and women. Prison sentences (the decisive factor in severity of sentence) are less frequently imposed on women. This is not the case, however, with regard to all offences. There are also situations where prison sentences are imposed more often on women than on men. Equally frequently, and sometimes even more often, women are sentenced to longer terms of imprisonment, that is, to terms of morethan three years. Suspended prison sentences are commoner among women than among men. But this is not the predominant type of sentence in all types of crime. For sometimes it is less frequent than limitation of liberty, and fines. In cases of suspended prison sentences, women are more likely than men to get sentences of less than a year's duration. Women are more likely than men to receive sentences consisting of a fine plus imprisonment. This is a consequence of the kind of offence they commit. Generally the fine is in the order of from 5,000 to 10,000 zlotys. The lowest fines are imposed on women more often than on men. The lowest sentences of limitation of liberty are imposed more often on women than on men. In both groups, the sentences range mostly from six months to a year. True, there are certain types of crime where maximum prison sentences are imposed on women more often than on men, but generally speaking the opposite is usually the case. Women, rather than men, are more likely to be given the lowest fines (imposed as independent penalties); more rarely, with the exception of a few types of ,crime, are they given the heaviest fines. It should be noted that as regards crimes against the family and the care of children (Art. 184, Art. 186), severer penalties are imposed against women, They are more frequently given higher fines along with terms of imprisonment, and also longer sentences of limitation of liberty. Greater leniency in the sentences imposed on women (a trend mentioned in many criminological studies) is indicated by the higher frequency of sentences that do not include imprisonment, although this trend as regards leniency is not always borne out by the severity of the sentences imposed.

Over-burdening of the prison system and serious reservations as to the usefulness of the prison sentence as a means of reducing crimes rates have led penologists and policymakers to seek ways to broaden the repertoire of criminal punishments available to the courts. In the search for effective and affordable sentencing policies, there has been increasing interest in the development and elaboration of intermediate sanctions as part of a menu of sentencing choices that match the severity of punishment to the seriousness of the crime.This trend is clearly reflected in the development of the penal system in Israel. In elaborating alternatives to imprisonment, an integrated model, incorporating welfare and rehabilitation considerations, has emerged. Nevertheless, Israeli judges have remarkably few sentencing alternatives at their disposal, and the penal sanctions available to them can be counted on the fingers of one hand, namely, imprisonment, suspended prison sentence, probation, community service, and the fine.

Background: Patients with schizophrenia have been shown to have an increased risk of criminality, especially violent crimes. Aims: The aim of the current study was to describe the pattern of crimes committed by Danish patients with schizophrenia and examine the sanctions given for crimes in relation to the different periods in the patients’ lives: not yet known to the psychiatric hospital system, known to the system but not yet diagnosed with schizophrenia, and after being diagnosed with schizophrenia. Methods: Information from the Danish Psychiatric Central Research Register was correlated with data from the Danish National Crime Register. Results: One of the more prominent findings was that 16% of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia receive a prison sentence or a suspended prison sentence, despite the fact that Denmark is a co-signatory of the European Prison Rules and should treat, rather than imprison, individuals with schizophrenia. Conclusion: The findings suggest that greater alertness is needed in the judicial system for individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia.

A Dutch court has rejected demands by the public prosecutor for a one year prison sentence for premeditated murder against a Frisian general practitioner, Dr Sippe Schat. Instead Dr Schat...

In the contemporary criminal law, a prison sentence is the basic and most important type of criminal sanction which may be imposed on criminal offenders for the purpose of preventing and counteracting crime. All criminal legislations recognize different models of imposing and executing the unconditional prison sentence. These are different substitutes or alternatives applicable in cases where unconditional imprisonment is not considered necessary. Thus, we can distinguish two forms of suspension of the prison sentence or some other kind of punishment: full and partial suspension. Full suspension of a prison sentence is known as a suspended sentence. It implies a complete exemption from the execution of a prison sentence (and/or some other punishment or measure) imposed by the competent court, for a specified period of time (probation period) and under specific conditions. In case the convicted offender who has been imposed a suspended sentence not meet the general and specific, mandatory or optional requirements, criminal law provides for the mandatory or optional revocation of the suspended sentence. In addition to the suspended sentence as a form of executing the imposed prison sentence, some modern criminal laws also recognize the suspended sentence as a special kind of criminal penalty, i.e. as a warning measure. Partial suspension of the imposed prison sentence (or any other criminal sanction of institutional character) is called a conditional release. It implies a partial suspension of prison sentence under certain conditions and for a specified period, but only after the convicted offender has already served part of the imposed prison sentence. In order to be granted a conditional release, the convicted offender has to cumulatively meet the prescribed requirements. These criteria are used for assessing the scope of attained special prevention pertaining to the convicted offender, particularly in terms of the impact exerted on his/her correction, re-education and re-socialization. The prerequisite for implementing these measures is the fulfillment of the formal requirements (including the type and duration of the imposed and served prison sentence), as well as the requirements related to the discretionary court assessment that prison sentence is no longer necessary in the specific case because the goals (purpose) of punishment may be achieved even without the enforcement of prison sentences in whole or in part. In this paper, the author discusses the concept, characteristics, requirements and methods of implementing these forms of prison sentence suspension in the criminal law of the Republic of Serbia from the perspective of legal theory, practice and comparative law.

An Australian neuroscientist has received a two year suspended prison sentence after pleading guilty to falsifying research that purported to show that transcranial magnetic stimulation could improve speech difficulties in...

A nurse who gave the wrong blood type to a patient who later died has been given a suspended prison sentence.

A woman who defrauded the NHS of £88,000 by faking her identity to gain three nursing student places has been given a suspended prison sentence.