Determinate Sentencing Research Articles

Expert psychiatric reports for the Parole Board for England and Wales

SUMMARY The Parole Board for England and Wales advises on the release, recall and licence conditions of a small subgroup of prisoners serving determinate sentences and the majority of those serving indeterminate sentences. Since the establishment of the Parole Board in 1968, the parole process has been shaped and clarified by further legislation and case law. In certain scenarios, psychiatric expert evidence may be sought to inform the Board's determination of whether a prisoner can be safely released into the community. Psychiatrists preparing expert reports for the Parole Board should be familiar with the current operationalisation of parole. This involves an understanding not only of the functioning of the Parole Board, but also of the criminal justice context in which prisoners subject to parole are managed. Having set the scene, by describing the role of the Parole Board and the wider context, this article examines how to undertake assessments and complete psychiatric reports for the Board.

More Education of Juvenile Offenders In Sentences Of Imprisonment: A Reform And Justification Approach As A Consequence Of Niklas Luhmann's Systems Theory

Background: In order to meet the demands of contemporary society, German juvenile criminal law needs a necessary reform. Consequently, this article proposes the reintroduction of indeterminate sentencing as an instrument for an overall social benefit to this need for reform and to counter the existing determinate sentencing system in place today. This specific sentencing system is understood to be the current guideline and norm currently implemented. According to Luhmann's systems theory, this contradicts the diversity of societies and the unique individuality of each member within them. In this perspective, individuals have the right to assert their rights and define their norms as long as they do not break the law or commit a criminal offence. Methods: The discussion surrounding indeterminate sentencing reached its conclusion in the late 1990s, so a lack of scientific research exists. However, considering the societal transformation and development of the younger generation, the reintroduction of indeterminate sentencing seems opportune. Niklas Luhmann’s flexible systems theory from the 1980 s is well suited to support this reintroduction. Based on a relevant literature review and the development of tightening in German juvenile law, this article adopts an analytical approach supported by social, legal and political research. It provides a framework elucidating the reasons and the appropriate form for reintroduc ing indeterminate sentencing as a useful method to increase resocialis ation among the youth . This framework includes practical approaches such as combining education, professional training and social education, all aimed at implementing a rehabilitative approach within the juvenile justice system, similar to the original law that was abandoned. Results and Conclusions: If this occurs, the indeterminate sentence allows for a more individualised approach, establishing an individual-oriented minimum sentence while maintaining a maximum duration. Thus, it aligns with Luhmann's flexible systems theory approach and proves relevant to the current circumstances of the youth generation. Such an approach offers greater benefits by emphasising the integration of education within the prison sentence for resocialisation, surpassing the capabilities of the current determinate sentencing in juvenile criminal law. The actual recidivism rates average between 25% and 30% depending on the sentence. With an education-focused approach adjusted to the juvenile offender , coupled with a realistic future- oriented education system in and after the sentence, the process of resocialis ation stands a better chance of success . Although the research on this topic is in its early stages, this approach serves as an initial step towards instigating the necessary reform within juvenile law.

Policy For Formulation Of Criminal Sanctions Against Narcotics Criminal Offenders

In essence, narcotics are substances both natural and synthetic, namely narcotics, psychotropics and other addictive substances. If they enter the human body without following health regulations, they have an effect on the brain in the central structure and if misused, it is against legal provisions. Narcotics were first made by the British and then spread to mainland Asia, from China, Hong Kong, Japan to Indonesia.Examined from the optics of material criminal law, the Narcotics Law has several systems for formulating criminal sanctions (strafsoort) and several systems for formulating the duration of criminal witnesses (strafmaat). The system for formulating the length of criminal sanctions (strafmaat) is a fixed/definite sentence system in the form of a definite criminal threat, an indefinite sentence system in the form of a threat of a maximum length of sentence, then a determinate sentence system in the form of determining the minimum and maximum limits for the duration of a criminal threat and an indeterminate sentence system in the form of no the maximum criminal limit is determined. The law-making body completely delegates criminal policy (discretion) to criminal implementing officials at a lower level, for example in determining the size, nature or duration of punishment for perpetrators of certain crimes. The formulation system is indeterminate, determinate, presumptive and mandatory. Basically, according to criminal law science, there are several types of systems for formulating criminal sanctions (strafsoort), namely single/imperative formulation systems, alternative formulation systems, cumulative formulation systems, cumulative-alternative (mixed/combined) formulation systems and blind/blanch formulation systems. . Likewise, only for the system of formulating the length of criminal sanctions (strafmaat), there is a definite sentence system in the form of a threat of a definite length of sentence, a fixed/indefinite sentence system or maximum system, namely a threat of a maximum length of sentence, then a determinate sentence system in the form of a specified minimum limit and maximum criminal threat and indeterminate sentence system in the form of no specified maximum criminal limit, the law-making body gives full responsibility to criminal policy (decretion) to criminal implementing officials at lower levels, for example in determining the size, nature or duration of punishment for perpetrators certain crimes.

Justice for the blackest malefactors? Determinate prison sentences, early release, and the ECHR

AbstractIn the light of the High Court's decision in R (Khan) v Secretary of State for Justice [2020] 1 WLR 3932 this paper contends that a revised approach to the interpretation of Articles 5 and 7 of the European Convention on Human Rights is needed. The paper argues that the Article 5 ECHR right to liberty and security plays a developing, though overlooked, role in the context of regulating determinate prison sentences. English law's conclusion that Article 5 of the ECHR has little to offer in this context is wrong and needs to be reconsidered. Equally, a more generous interpretation of Article 7 of the ECHR is now required: an approach which reflects the reality of determinate sentences.

An exploration of ECtHR jurisprudence governing the administration of release processes for life and long-term sentence prisoners: Perspectives from the United Kingdom

The purpose of the research themes examined in this article is to contribute to the ongoing debate pertaining to substantive criminal laws and procedures governing sentence reviews of prolonged detention for life and long-term sentence prisoners in accordance with Article 5(4) ECHR. The incompatibility of whole life irreducible sentences with Article 3 ECHR is examined through the lens of the ECtHR judgment in Vinter, Moore and Bamber v United Kingdom. The analyses of ECtHR jurisprudence is heavily skewed towards the administration of indeterminate life, and by analogy long-term determinate sentences, in the United Kingdom which is an outlier jurisdiction in a European context given that, in conjunction with Turkey, it accounts for the majority of persons serving life sentences. The article focuses on pertinent ECHR provisions and associated ECtHR jurisprudence, with perspectives from the United Kingdom on their implementation as a case study. While key themes are disinterred from the ECtHR’s jurisprudence that will presumably inform sentence review procedures in European states, a broader analysis of release systems operative in a European context is beyond the scope of the article.

Educational Opportunity and the Carceral System: Sentencing Policies and Black Men's College Enrollment

This paper explores whether the Federal Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, which increased the disproportionate incarceration of young Black men, was also associated with changes in the likelihood of college enrollment for Black men in states with more punitive sentencing laws. I measure the association between the introduction of state sentencing laws, such as truth-in-sentencing (TIS), and college enrollment. These laws could have decreased the likelihood of Black male college enrollment by removing these men from the population in the years in which they would have attended college. To explore the impact of the passage of sentencing laws on college enrollment, I carry out a differences-in-differences analysis and an event study from 1992 to 2000. In the years after TIS passed, significant decreases occurred in the likelihood of college enrollment for Black young men when compared to the college enrollment of young White men in TIS states. However, there were no significant decreases when comparing college enrollment of young Black men in TIS states with enrollment for young Black men in non-TIS states. With respect to state sentencing schemes, voluntary guidelines, determinate sentences, presumptive recommended sentences, presumptive determinate sentences, and recommended determinate sentences were associated with a lower likelihood of college enrollment for Black men.

Determinate Sentencing and the Epidemic of Biases in American Courts

The 1984 Sentencing Reform Act was first put into place to direct court rulings and mitigate biases from the outcomes of sentences. By implementing universal responses to any given scenario, the ability to rule discretionally based on external factors was to be eliminated, designated to a relic of a past era. Unfortunately, the efforts were less than successful. Due in large part to the decisions made in the case United States vs. Booker in 2005, America has started its shift back to discretionary sentencing policies. The dissatisfaction with the outcomes of determinate sentencing was made clear, but the issues were not inherent with the guidelines as much as with the same issues which have plagued the country for over two centuries now. While failing to live up to its high expectations, determinate sentencing still manages to surpass discretionary sentencing measures by its structural simplicity, philosophies, and potential. In the United States, many disparities exist similarly outside of the judicial system, including wealth, race, sexual orientation, and gender disparities. With each of these segments of society, unique disproportionalities arise that have helped to highly benefit only small percentages of the community, creating a system that overall fails to reconcile and inevitably exacerbates many of the limited community resources and impacts of disparate treatment. This paper intends to display the fundamental failings of strict sentencing guidelines and purport that, while they have failed in living up to their expectations of eliminating structural inequality, the disparities exist not by failing to allow discretion, but by failing to limit these systems which perpetuate its existence.

Hjørnestenene i den danske kriminalforsorg:

AbstractThe principles of normalisation and openness are cornerstones of modern prison philosophy. Normalisation involves making prison life as similar as possible to normal outside life and openness counteracts the negative effects of the total institution (Rentzmann, 1996). Both normalisation and openness imply that it should be the norm to place a person in an open prison. He or she should only be placed in a closed prison if there is a concrete, real risk of escape or if the prisoner is considered dangerous. The question is: does the Danish prison system in the era of the millennium still pay tribute to these two cornerstones when it comes to prisoner placement and furloughs? Since sentence length and disciplinary offences can determine both prisoner placement and prison furloughs, the article also explores developments in determinate sentencing and disciplinary punishment. Based on statistics and legislation, the analysis reveals that the severity of penalties increased during the period 2002-2019, e.g., average sentence length increased, more prisoners were placed in closed prisons, fewer prison furloughs were permitted, and more prisoners were exposed to disciplinary punishment. These developments can be explained by laws and rules implemented to deal with gang-related crime andgang-connected prisoners, who make up about 10 percent of the total prison population. While these strict laws and rules are designed to discipline the few, they have influenced the many and undermined the basic principles of normalisation and openness in Danish prisons.

Understanding overdose incidents in Canadian federal custody

BackgroundWhile the community effects of the opioid-related drug crisis in Canada are well documented, limited detailed data is available on overdose trends among custodial populations. Given that this crisis has disproportionate impacts on justice involved persons, research is needed to understand the implications of this crisis within institutional settings. MethodsWe examined all overdose incidents that occurred between the 2012/2013 and 2018/2019 fiscal years in a federal correctional institution in Canada. An incident report search was conducted to identify overdose related incidents during this period. Information about the incident and characteristics of the victim was collected from incident reports, investigations, and victim case files. ResultsOver the period under examination, overdose incidents steadily increased (i.e., from 40 in 2012/2013, to 110 non-fatal incidents in 2018/2019), although there was considerable regional and institutional variation. The number of incidents involving opioids, particularly fentanyl, increased both in raw numbers and as a percentage of overall incidents (i.e., from 3% in 2012/2013 to 47% in 2017/2018, and 34% of non-fatal incidents in 2018/2019). Other substances continue to contribute to overdose incidents; in fact, non-opioid prescription medications (i.e., non-illicit medications such as anti-convulsant drugs and anti-depressants) remain the most common among intentional non-fatal incidents. Relative to the general in-custody population, victims of overdose incidents tended to be younger and were more likely to be serving a determinate sentence, be on a repeat federal sentence, and be serving time for robbery. Mental health conditions and histories of substance use were common. ConclusionThe effects of the overdose crisis are pronounced within certain Canadian federal institutions, illustrated by a growing number of fentanyl-related incidents. Institutional variation and variation in incidents (e.g., substance and intentionality) highlight diversity in drug activities among this custodial population and the need for multi-faceted responses that are reflective of local situations.

The Relationship between the War on Drugs and Crime

Researchers and policymakers have long considered the War on Drugs with respect to mass incarceration, monetary cost, and impact on minority communities. This paper seeks to take this evaluation one step further and determine whether the War on Drugs policies impact total crime, violent crime, and property crime. Panel data from the years of 1975 to 2002 tracks variables such as drug arrests, determinate sentencing, habitual drug offender laws, minimum sentencing, severity levels for cocaine and marijuana possession, police presence, prison admissions, and more throughout the fifty states. In the OLS, fixed effects, and random effects models, an increased police presence and additional prison admissions contribute to higher crime rates. Increased drug arrests, resulting directly from the War on Drugs, consistently increase overall, violent, and property crime, with significance in every panel data regression. With the exception of determinate sentencing, individual War on Drugs laws, such as minimum sentences, habitual drug laws, and severity levels have mixed results, with no consistent effect on crime rates.

The Limits of Federal Criminal Sentencing Policy; or, Confessions of Two Reformed Reformers

Sixteen years after the passage of the Sentencing Reform Act, how is federal sentencing reform faring? Certainly, the Commission has done its first job of promulgating determinate sentencing guidelines to replace the previous sentencing system. Those guidelines have generated a formidable body of federal sentencing law, including thousands of judicial decisions. The reviews of that body of law are mixed, causing consternation to some and satisfaction to others. On a more fundamental policy level, there is evidence that the guidelines have advanced one of the initial objectives of sentencing reform, which was to reduce the amount of unarticulated variation in federal sentencing outcomes. But what has been learned about the sentencing process and about the efficacy of punishment, and what do those lessons imply for the future potential of sentencing reform and the continuing work of the Commission? The purpose of this Article, written by two participants in the early phases of the federal sentencing reform, is to pose those questions. We also suggest some tentative answers, based upon our experience in and subsequent observation of the progression of sentencing reform.

Retrieval Topic Recurrent Memory Network for Remote Sensing Image Captioning

Remote sensing image (RSI) captioning aims to generate sentences to describe the content of RSIs. Generally, five sentences are used to describe the RSI in caption datasets. Every sentence can just focus on part of images’ contents due to the different attention parts of annotation persons. One annotated sentence may be ambiguous compared with other four sentences. However, previous methods, treating five sentences separately, may generate an ambiguous sentence. In order to consider five sentences together, a collection of words, which named topic words contained common information among five sentences, is jointly incorporated into a captioning model to generate a determinate sentence that covers common contents in RSIs. Instead of employing a naive recurrent neural network, a memory network in which topic words can be naturally included as memory cells is introduced to generate sentences. A novel retrieval topic recurrent memory network is proposed to utilize the topic words. First, a topic repository is built to record the topic words in training datasets. Then, the retrieval strategy is exploited to obtain the topic words for a test image from topic repository. Finally, the retrieved topic words are incorporated into a recurrent memory network to guide the sentence generation. In addition to getting topics through retrieval, the topic words of test images can also be edited manually. The proposed method sheds light on controllability of caption generation. Experiments are conducted on two caption datasets to evaluate the proposed method.

Courtroom Context and Sentencing

This study provides an evaluation of the major policy shift in sentencing practices over the past half-century – namely the shift from indeterminate to determinant sentencing policies and the use of sentencing guidelines. The theoretical literature on courtroom organization and focal concerns informs this evaluation of determinate sentencing practices in Florida. Drawing from prior theoretical and empirical research, hierarchical linear and generalized linear models are estimated to assess courtroom effects on individual level sentencing outcomes. The findings document that location matters when sentenced in Florida. Specifically, the likelihood of being sentenced to prison and the length of sentence varies across counties, even after controlling for individual case and offender characteristics and a variety of contextual characteristics. Additionally, the influence of legal and extra-legal factors on prison in/out and sentence length decisions varies significantly across counties. Several court characteristics, including court size, caseload pressure and trial rate assert direct influence on a county’s likelihood of prison in/out and mean sentence length decisions.

The President's Commission and Sentencing, Then and Now

AbstractThe proposals made in 1967 by the U.S. President's Commission on Law Enforcement and Administration of Justice on sentencing were sensible, humane, well informed, and ambitious. They were premised on an assumption that indeterminate sentencing, then ubiquitous, would long continue, and sought to remedy its weaknesses and build on its strengths. That assumption proved wrong. Within a decade, indeterminate sentencing and its rehabilitative aspirations lost credibility and legitimacy. Within two decades, American policies incorporated features such as determinate sentences, lengthy prison terms, and mandatory minimum sentence laws that the Commission explicitly repudiated. The Commission's influence is evident in successful sentencing reform initiatives of the 1970s and early 1980s, some of which survive in a few places in compromised forms. Many of the Commission's proposals to make sentencing fairer, more consistent, and less vulnerable to influence by political considerations and public emotion are as germane today as they were in 1967.

Equality and Human Dignity: The Missing Ingredients in American Sentencing

AbstractConcern for equality and human dignity is largely absent from American sentencing. Prison sentences are imposed much more often than in any other Western country. Prison terms are incomparably longer. The greater frequency of imprisonment is a product of punitive attitudes and politicization of crime control policies. The longer terms result partly from abolition of parole release in every jurisdiction for all or some inmates, but mostly from the proliferation since the mid-1980s of mandatory minimum, three-strikes, life without parole, and truth-in-sentencing laws. The ideas that offenders should be treated as equals and with concern and respect for their interests largely disappeared, though they had been animating values of earlier indeterminate and determinate sentencing systems. Their disregard is evident in the nature of contemporary laws but also in low-visibility policies and practices including the near absence of meaningful systems of appellate sentence review, low standards of proof at ...

Severe personality disorder, treatment engagement and the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012: what you need to know

Empirical research has demonstrated a link between legal coercion and treatment engagement following conviction among those with severe personality disorder. Legal coercive pressures were often applied by the Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection (IPP), until it was replaced by the Extended Determinate Sentence by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012. In this paper, it is proposed that use of the new determinate sentence will lessen motivation for treatment engagement. One effect of treatment refusal may be greater reliance by the Secretary of State for Justice on his jurisdiction to transfer prisoners due for release to secure hospital transfers under the Mental Health Act 1983. Not only will this risk posturing undermine the principal aim of the Offender Personality Disorder Implementation Pathway to improve treatment engagement among the target group, it will also have negative implications for medical practitioners working in secure forensic hospitals. To demonstrate what is at stake, the paper briefly recapitulates empirical findings familiar to readers of the journal, before drawing on original unpublished data.

The effect of imprisonment on recommitment: an analysis using exact, coarsened exact, and radius matching with the propensity score

This study examines the effect of prison versus community sanctions on recommitment to prison and compares two levels of community supervision, community control (house arrest) and probation, evaluating whether the findings are contingent on the type of matching methods used in the analysis. Logistic regression was conducted on unmatched and matched samples. Exact, coarsened exact, and radius-matching procedures were used to create a selection on observables design. Matching variables included current offense, demographics, criminal history, supervision violations, and a rich set of Florida Sentencing Guidelines information culled from an official scoring sheet. Florida judges use this instrument to sentence offenders within the framework of the state determinate sentencing system. The results show that with exact matching, there is no effect of imprisonment on recommitment, while the other procedures suggest a specific deterrent effect of imprisonment. All four analysis methods showed that offenders under community control are more likely to reoffend than those under normal probation. Analyses between the matched and unmatched prison observations demonstrate that the matched set of prisoners is composed of offenders who have less extensive criminal records and less serious conviction offenses than unmatched offenders regardless of the matching algorithm. Contrary to a prior analysis of these data, which found a criminogenic effect of prison, a null effect was found using exact matching. Comparing the matching procedures, the more precise the match the less likely there was an effect of prison. However, community control was criminogenic regardless of the matching procedure.

The Automatic Early Release and Supervision of Prisoners in Scotland

The Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993 allowed for long- term prisoners – those subject to determinate sentences of four years or more and life sentences – to apply for release on parole at the half-way stage or to be “automatically” released on non-parole licence at the two-thirds stage of their sentence. Any decision to release prisoners before the two-thirds stage was taken by the Parole Board for Scotland, which also set all licence conditions, including statutory supervision in the community until the end of the sentence (unless otherwise revoked). Released prisoners who breached their licence conditions could be recalled to prison to serve the remaining period of their sentence, but otherwise the aim was for a period of monitoring and supervision in the community prior to sentence completion.

Balancing the Goals of Determinate and Indeterminate Sentencing Systems

Balancing the Goals of Determinate and Indeterminate Sentencing Systems

THE OFFENDER PERSONALITY DISORDER PATHWAY: RISKING REHABILITATION?

Following over a decade of treatment refusal by 'risky' offenders preventively detained in Dangerous and Severe Personality Disorder hospital and prison units, the coalition government now aims to improve treatment engagement in high secure prisons by clarifying pathways out of detention. This article asks whether the reconfiguration will end reliance upon preventive detention for public protection. Drawing on original empirical data collected by the author, it is argued that the government is unaware that offenders with 'severe personality disorder' appear to engage with treatment only if it increases their chances of achieving expedited parole. Hitherto, this incentive was provided by the Indeterminate Sentence for Public Protection; its replacement with determinate sentences under the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 will worsen treatment engagement, because they provide offenders with a prison release date. The troubling result may be increased reliance by the Secretary of State for Justice on his inherent jurisdiction under the Mental Health Act 1983 to transfer offenders due for prison release to secure psychiatric hospitals. To counter this limitation of risk-focused decision-making, it is proposed that judges be able to impose a new hybrid order combining a custodial term with a subsequent community mental health treatment requirement.