U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government, Department of Justice.

NCJRS Virtual Library

The Virtual Library houses over 235,000 criminal justice resources, including all known OJP works.
Click here to search the NCJRS Virtual Library

RANKING OFFENCE SERIOUSNESS IN REVIEWING STATUTORY MAXIMUM PENALTIES

NCJ Number
142375
Journal
Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology Volume: 23 Issue: 3 Dated: (September 1990) Pages: 165-191
Author(s)
R Fox; A Freiberg
Date Published
1990
Length
27 pages
Annotation
This article examines approaches to ranking the relative seriousness of criminal conduct in Victoria, Australia, that are based on the assessment of harm and culpability, the analysis of current judicial sentencing practices, and public opinion research.
Abstract
Serious reform of the legislative component of sentencing requires more than simply adding more sentencing options or consolidating various sentencing provisions into a single statute, such as the Victorian Penalties and Sentences Act of 1985. Sentencing reform requires that a global view be taken of the interrelationships between offenses and penalties, and justice dictates that similar offenses be treated alike in both legislative and judicial arenas. Further, sentencing reform requires that allocations of statutory maxima be made in the context of the criminal sanction system's totality and not in an ad hoc fashion. The task of reclassifying all offenses and sanctions according to their gravity is difficult but necessary. Various approaches to ranking the relative seriousness of criminal conduct and allocating statutory penalties are detailed. A combination of the approaches is applied to 500 offenses in Victoria, both serious and trivial, in order to produce a revised ranking of statutory offenses and to rationalize their accompanying sanctions. 25 references, 24 notes, and 5 tables

Downloads

No download available

Availability