NCJ Number
56872
Journal
Justice of the Peace Volume: 142 Issue: 28 Dated: (JULY 1978) Pages: 409-412
Date Published
1978
Length
4 pages
Annotation
A REPORT OF THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON THE PENAL SYSTEM IN ENGLAND, SUGGESTING A CHANGE IN THE FORMULATION OF MAXIMUM SENTENCES, IS CRITIQUED.
Abstract
BASING MAXIMUM SENTENCES FOR A GIVEN CRIME UPON THE 'WORST POSSIBLE CASE', AS PARLIAMENT COMMANDS, DOES NOT DETER CRIME, LEAVES TOO MUCH FOR THE JUDGE'S DISCRETION, AND IMPLIES DISPARATE STANDARDS FOR PARLIAMENT AND THE COURTS. TO REPLACE THE PRESENT SYSTEM, THE ADVISORY COUNCIL RECOMMENDS TWO-TIER SENTENCING, WITH A SET OF MAXIMUM SENTENCES EACH FOR ORDINARY AND EXCEPTIONALLY BAD OFFENSES. FOR THE FORMER, MAXIMUM PENALTIES MIGHT BE BASED ON SENTENCES ACTUALLY SET FOR 90 PERCENT OF OFFENDERS (A TABLE OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED MAXIMUM SENTENCES IS INCLUDED. HOWEVER, THE ADVISORY COUNCIL IGNORES THE TARIFF, A CONCEPT CLOSE OT ITS OWN DOUBLE TIER, AND A MEANS THE COURTS THEMSELVES HAVE DEVISED TO BRIDGE THE GAP BETWEEN PARLIAMENT'S MAXIMUM SENTENCES AND COMMON RANGE OF SENTENCES. UNDER THE TARIFF, LENGTH OF A PRISON TERM IS BASED ON A SCALE WITHIN WHICH SENTENCES NORMALLY FALL, AND AN OFFENDER'S POINT IN THE RANGE IS DETERMINED BY MITIGATING FACTORS. SUPERIORITY OF TARIFF OVER THE TWO-TIER SYSTEM IS MAINTAINED SINCE (1) THE TARIFF RELIES ON A JUDGE'S EXPERIENCE FOR SETTING PENALTIES, BEARING ON EACH OFFENSE RATHER THAN HAVING SOME ARITHMETICAL RELATIONSHIP TO SENTENCES ALREADY PASSED; AND (2) IT CAN BE EXCEEDED WITHOUT ARTIFICIALLY RESTRAINING THE SENTENCER. IN DISCUSSING EXCEPTIONAL CASES (10 PERCENT OF CURRENT PRISON SENTENCES), IT IS AGREED THAT THESE NEED TO BE STRICTLY DEFINED, BUT THE ADVISORY COUNCIL IS FAULTED FOR REJECTING DETERRENCE AND PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC AS REASONS FOR EXCEEDING LOWER MAXIMUM SENTENCES. (PAP)