Discuss whether or not sentencing guidelines or a determinate sentencing model can control judicial discretion.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

With multiple sentencing models, judges hold the future of the offenders' punishment and rehabilitation in a delicate balance with a great amount of discretion. Sentencing guidelines have been implemented to give judges a recommended sentence based on the seriousness of the offense and the background of the offender. Usually, the more serious the crime and the more extensive the offender's background, the longer the prison term recommended by the guidelines. Guidelines are designed to reduce racial and gender disparity by eliminating judicial discretion. Determinate sentencing must control judicial discretion to some degree, because there are ranges suggested for different crimes. Additionally, by issuing recommendations and trying to make sentencing more rational, judges execute less discretion in considering multiple factors on their own and instead work from guidelines. However, certain guidelines, such as those for presumptive sentencing, can result in harsher punishments that can lead to a violation of defendants' rights. Consider the case of Blakely v. Washington where a judge considered aggravating factors to enhance the sentence. The Supreme Court ruled that this was a violation of the defendant's Sixth Amendment rights. In this case, guidelines are more advisory, which means that ultimately the judge can exercise discretion if they wish.