Compare and contrast indeterminate and determinate sentencing models.

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

When a convicted offender is sentenced to prison, the statutes of the jurisdiction in which the crime was committed determine the penalties that the court may impose. The indeterminate sentence represents a range between a "light" minimum sentence and a lengthy maximum sentence. Under this scheme, the actual length of time served by the offender is controlled both by the judge and the correctional agency and has the potential to factor in time off for good behavior if the state subscribes to that practice and eligibility for parole when appropriate. The basic purpose of indeterminate sentencing is to individualize the sentence in the interests of rehabilitating the offender. In other words, "treatment should fit the offender" rather than a sentence being applied to all offenders who committed the same crime. Due to dissatisfaction with the disparity and uncertainty of indeterminate sentencing, the federal government has abandoned this model in favor of determinate sentencing to curb judicial discretion. Determinate sentences offer a fixed term of years, the maximum set in law by the legislature, to be served by the offender sentenced to prison or jail for a particular crime. To help regulate the length of sentences, sentencing guidelines are used that give judges a recommended sentence based on the seriousness of the crime and the background of an offender. If the crime was more serious or the offender has a criminal history, the recommended sentence will be longer. In addition to curbing judicial discretion, determinate sentencing is aimed at reducing racial and gender disparity in sentencing.