The United States of America's Court System and Disparities in Sentencing

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to enlighten and explore sentencing disparities in the courts of United States of America. The core objective of this paper is to describe different types of sentencing disparities in the courts of the United States of America. The major forms of sentencing disparities are related to biasness of sentences subjected to gender discrimination, racial biasness and disparities related to other characteristics of the sentencer. Sentencing disparities reflect any discrimination or variation in the sentences authorized by the judicial courts of the United States. These sentencing disparities can be authorized by several reasons and grounds on the basis of which the judges declare their decisions. However, sentencing disparity is an unethical process which is extremely prohibited by the Constitution of the United States. Nonetheless, sentencing disparities are commonly observed in the courts of the United States of America. The paper will also focus on any correlation or relationship between the judicial system design of the courts in the United States and the occurrence of sentencing disparities in order to access the reason behind sentencing disparities. Sentencing disparity is an unethical legislative process as it incorporates the element of biasness in legislative system. Hence, the judicial system of the United States must construct effective measures in order to minimize sentencing disparities in the courts.

Table of Contents

Introduction4

Sentencing Disparities Subjected to Gender Biasness7

Sentencing Disparities Subjected to Racism8

Sentencing Disparity Subjected to Sentencer Characteristics9

The Correlation between American Judicial System and Sentencing Disparities10

Alternative Sentencing Procedure15

The Sentencing Disparity in Context of Different Case Examples16

Conclusion18

The United States of America's Court System and Disparities in Sentencing

Introduction

The history of sentencing in the United States has been marked by several significant transformations. Until the late 1800s, juries had a dominant role in sentencing. However, state legislatures sought greater uniformity in sentencing practices and enacted laws that shifted sentencing authority to the judge. The discretion of the judge to craft a sentence was enhanced by new theories of penology. Indeterminate sentencing allowed judges to set a minimum and a maximum term of confinement but left it up to the parole board to determine when the defendants should be released. This sentencing policy, which was built on the assumption that criminals could be rehabilitated, remained dominant until the late 1970s.

Sentencing is the penalty imposed by a court upon a person convicted of a crime. The types of sentences include capital punishment, imprisonment, fines, restitution, and probation. Aside from the imposition of the death penalty, juries generally are not involved in sentencing, leaving it to the judge to make the ultimate decision. The particular sentence may be mandated by statute or the judge may have discretion to set the specific penalties based on the crime and the defendant's character and background. Since the 1980s, sentencing guidelines have become popular. These guidelines use a point system based on the criminal offense and the criminal history of the defendant. A high number results in more severe criminal ...