NCJ Number
183676
Date Published
1999
Length
289 pages
Annotation
This volume examines sentencing in Great Britain with respect to the goals of proportionality, aggravation, mitigation, and mercy and the conflicts between these goals and the considerations that persuade courts to pursue them with leniency or severity.
Abstract
The analysis refutes jurisprudential attacks on the propriety of mercy and discusses the shortcomings of the Court of Appeal’s approaches to consistency and other sentencing principles. The analysis considers the concepts of desert and utility as justifications for punishments, statutory and miscellaneous aggravation, preventive detention, noncustodial precautions such as sex offender registries, and statutory and miscellaneous pleas relating to mitigation. Additional chapters focus the roles in sentencing of harm to victims, harm to offenders or their dependents, youth, old age, mental disorder, revenge, provocation, women’s situations, and other mitigating factors. The discussion notes that proportionality, aggravating factors, and mitigating factors are influential topics in determining contemporary sentencing. However, books on sentencing overlook these topics. In addition, inconsistencies that pervade sentencing further complicate the issue. The Court of Appeal has added to its guidelines, and recent legislation has attempted to address the topics of aggravation and mitigation; however, these efforts have created more problems. The Court of Appeal’s decisions are not always consistent; little guidance exists on matters of principle. Similarly, recent legislation such as the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 has added to the complexity. Chapter notes, appended list of guideline cases and lists of serious offenses, index, and 137 references