Criminal Law Commons^™

Judges, Speaking Of Death: Criminal Sentencing As A Socio-Cultural Practice In India’S Trial Courts, Ashna Devaprasad

Socio-Legal Review

What role does language play in legitimising the exercise of judicial discretion during sentencing? And what can a judge’s linguistic choices tell us about the wider sentencing culture of a criminal justice system? Sentencing outcomes have long attracted considerable attention in criminal law scholarship, but the process of sentencing – the logics judges use, the narratives they construct, and the audiences they seek to persuade – has received much less empirical scrutiny. Building on ideas from “law and culture” and organisational sociology literature, this Article proposes studying sentencing as a “socio-cultural” practice; one that qualitatively examines the judicial function of …

Blurred Lines: Did Booker Change Federal Sentencing Outcomes?, Hugh M. Mundy

Pace Law Review

This article considers whether United States v. Booker, the 2005 Supreme Court decision that replaced the then-mandatory federal sentencing guidelines system with an advisory scheme, had any enduring impact on sentencing outcomes. Commemorating Booker’s recent twentieth anniversary requires a balancing act: at once, recognizing the decision’s watershed impact while avoiding claims of lasting change where little exists. The criminal defense community hailed the ruling as a kind of liberation from the guidelines’ dispassionate rigidity. Today, while most lawyers and defendants would still prefer the current system, a legitimate question exists about Booker’s actual effect on federal sentencing. I propose that …

The Smarter Sentencing Act Of 2026: A Major Step Toward Federal Sentencing Reform, Riley Amdor

Criminal Law Society Blog

This article examines The Smarter Sentencing Act of 2026, a bill that proposes to reduce minimum sentence requirements for certain drug offenses—particularly those that are nonviolent. Research has shown that prolonged prison sentences often do not lead to its intended effects and even tend to cause increased recidivism and criminogenic effects. Additionally, by reducing minimum sentencing requirements for these nonviolent drug offenses, judges are given more discretion when sentencing drug offenders, which allows for the branches of government to be more balanced and promotes leniency where judges believe it is warranted. Further, the reduction of minimum sentences for these nonviolent …

Plea Bargaining In The United States Military, Frank Rosenblatt

Journal Articles

This article offers a primer on plea bargaining in the U.S. military justice system. American military justice is like criminal justice in the rest of the country in that the lion’s share of cases are plea bargained. But there are key differences between military and civilian plea bargaining. First, a central factor of negotiations in military plea bargaining is whether the accused will keep his or her job. Second, the military has a wider range of disposition options than traditional penal sanctions, including nonjudicial punishment and administrative sanctions. Finally, the military seemingly permits more discretion and offers less binding guidance …

Disposing Of Misdemeanors: An Empirical Perspective, Cynthia Alkon, Jonathan Marshall, Kyle Chrisman, Lydia Sidhom

Faculty Scholarship

While the U.S. Supreme Court has characterized the criminal legal system as a “system of pleas,” new empirical evidence suggests that, at least for misdemeanors, it is more accurately described as a system of dismissals. This Article draws on New York’s Pretrial Release Dataset, a unique publicly available administrative dataset that, to date, includes over 1.3 million criminal cases with 112 variables, of which 914,521 are misdemeanors. No other state in the country has made comparable criminal case-processing data publicly accessible at this scale. Using this dataset, the Article examines criminal case processing in ways that were not previously possible, …

Imprisonment When An Offender Cannot Pay A Fine, Benjamin Joshua Ong

Research Collection Yong Pung How School Of Law

According to a common-law rule in place since the 1993 case of Low Meng Chay v Public Prosecutor [1993] 1 SLR(R) 46, if the court is minded to impose a fine but the offender will clearly be unable to pay a fine, the offender should be sentenced to imprisonment instead (as opposed to a fine coupled with a default imprisonment term). While one can understand why the courts may apply this practice, the practice obscures the crucial distinction between: (a) being sentenced to a fine, then imprisoned in default of payment (which, it is submitted, is the correct course of …

The Real Impact Of General Deterrence: Empirical Insights From The Robbery Data Of Three American Cities, Andrew W. Eichner

Catholic University Law Review

General deterrence theory relies on the critical assumption that prospective offenders will be deterred from committing crimes when they are aware of the apprehension and punishment of others. This idea has been reiterated across thousands of years of Western political thought and has significant implications in modern American criminal sentencing, though it has not been historically subjected to rigorous testing. The recent availability of voluminous crime data permits a deeper examination of the real impact of sentencings on crime trends and allows the opportunity for previously impossible analyses regarding the efficacy of general deterrence.

To examine whether there is evidence …

The Deterrence Dilemma: Is It Time For Canada To Abandon General Deterrence As A Sentencing Objective?, Caitlin Salvino

Dalhousie Law Journal

When Canada first codified its sentencing framework in the Criminal Code, Parliament included deterrence as a sentencing objective. The sentencing objective of deterrence encompasses two aspects: specific deterrence for the individual offender and general deterrence for other potential offenders. I engage with the concept of general deterrence and its incorporation into Canadian sentencing law throughout this article. I argue that Parliament should abandon general deterrence as a sentencing objective under the Criminal Code. After reviewing the jurisprudence on general deterrence and conducting a systematic review of its current application in Ontario sentencing decisions, I argue that general deterrence should be …

Stewart V. Smith: A Misapplication Of North Carolina V. Pearce, Alton C. Stevens

Maine Law Review

Gordon Stewart was convicted of a felony and sentenced to fifteen to nineteen months in the house of correction and a $2,000 fine, or an additional 2,000 days in lieu thereof. Since he was indigent this represented a total sentence of approximately seven years. Upon petition to the Windsor County Court this original sentence was set aside as being in excess of the twenty-four month statutory maximum. Resentencing was ordered and a different judge sentenced respondent anew to a term of twenty-three to twenty-four months in the state prison with appropriate credit given for time already served. On appeal to …

Sentencing, Melvyn Zarr

Maine Law Review

Once the legislature has defined the acts it will punish as criminal, it must then establish a sentencing system. There are two principal features of a sentencing system: it grades crimes according to seriousness, and it apportions sentencing discretion among the legislature, the courts, and administrative agencies. The device for apportionment between the legislature and the courts is the mandatory sentence, by which the legislature may fix a period of imprisonment for a crime and forbid judges to grant probation. Apportionment of sentencing discretion between the courts and administrative agencies, on the other hand, is governed by the choice between …

"17 Going On 23": Sentencing Young People To Life In Canada, Debra Parkes

All Faculty Publications

This paper analyzes reported Canadian cases from 2008 to 2022 in which young people were sentenced for murder. It shows that, at least in these reported decisions, sentencing young people as adults for murder is not rare. The Crown routinely seeks life sentences for young people and the court orders them in the vast majority of cases in which they are sought. Life sentences for young people have become normalized and expected in murder cases, rather than exceptional. This paper delves into the case law to get a better picture of why and how this is happening.

The Grass Is Not Always Greener: How The Legalization Of Recreational Cannabis Across The United States Is At Odds With Incarceration And Continued Punishment, Marc Sendra

Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice

Whether you call it Mary Jane, skunky funky, green, ganja, reefer, or just plain-old cannabis, this special green plant doused in purple and orange accents has become a popular topic of discussion within the legal community and American culture. Cannabis has been held in “high” regard for its scientific advances in the medical industry, alongside its recreational usage, enjoyed by laughs and giggles, munchies, and plenty of water, leading to a wave of medical and recreational legalization.

Incentives for legalization come at the onset of promising medical research, economic growth motives, and social justice, reflecting upon a comprehensive approach that …

The Lasting Impact Of Ring V. Arizona On Capital Jury Trials, Kevin M. Morrow

Wyoming Law Review

The final decision on the imposition of the death penalty in the United States is made by either judges or juries. A wealth of empirical study has gone into comparing these two methods. Arizona, with its change to a jury-based system immediately after the landmark Supreme Court decision Ring v. Arizona, is divided into discrete eras of capital sentencing. For the first time, this article catalogs, and examines, the post-Ring capital trials that reached the question of life or death to explore systemic differences between jury and judge sentencings. The study revealed that while Arizona’s rate of death sentences increased …

Disentangling Safety And Accountability In Criminal Justice Policy, Benjamin Levin

Scholarship@WashULaw

In this Article, I argue that the U.S. criminal system and debates about criminal justice reform reflect an elision of two largely distinct social functions: ensuring public safety and imposing accountability for harmful conduct. Despite deep disagreement about the specifics, most commentators seem to accept that these are both important social functions. Abolitionists claim that the criminal system doesn’t keep people safe and provide accountability. Instead, it harms—and perhaps is meant to harm—people from marginalized communities and protects the interest of socially dominant groups. Reformers contend that the criminal system can and should serve the safety and/or accountability interests, but …

Capital Trifurcation, William W. Berry Iii

Texas A&M Law Review

The death penalty is disappearing in the United States. Annual executions remain under 25 per year, and new capital sentences per year have not exceeded 75 in over a decade.

Over the past two decades, however, a new kind of death sentence has emerged—life without parole (“LWOP”). In practice, LWOP and death sentences are functionally equivalent, as most death row inmates die of natural causes in prison, not execution. For both economic and moral reasons, most states are not actively executing prisoners.

Therefore, capital sentencing proceedings that focus on life versus death neglect the more consequential question—life without parole versus …

State V. Farnham: The Defendant's Exercise Of The Right To Stand Trial As Negative Character Evidence, Richard F. Buckley

Maine Law Review

A defendant in a criminal case may not receive a more severe sentence because he exercised his sixth amendment right to stand trial. However, determining when a court has more severely sentenced a defendant for exercising his constitutional right to a jury trial is a difficult task. Some argue that a defendant's choice to stand trial is relevant to the sentencing process as character evidence. The decision to stand trial, the argument goes, indicates a defendant's lack of remorse and an unwillingness to take the first step toward redemption by admitting his guilt. Others take the position that consideration in …

Debunking Criminal Restitution, Lula A. Hagos

Michigan Law Review

Criminal restitution—the money paid by a defendant to a victim—is often overlooked amidst growing scholarly consensus about the adverse impact of criminal court fines and fees. Restitution receives less attention because it is perceived as a fair and unobjectionable sanction with legitimate goals, while fines and fees are now widely condemned as primarily serving as a funding source for local and state governments. Consequently, the animated and extensive discourse around financial punishment largely excludes criminal restitution.

Though criminal restitution may appear to have legitimate penological purposes, it serves to perpetually punish defendants who are poor—the vast majority of those in …

Death By Jury: Jurisprudential Trends And Hybrid Capital Sentencing Authority, Jacob T. Hayes

Tennessee Journal of Law and Policy

No abstract provided.

Disparity And The Need For Sentencing Guidelines In Maine: A Proposal For Enhanced Appellate Review, Daniel E. Wathen

Maine Law Review

Perhaps in no other field of judicial endeavor is diversity and variety more apparent than when a sentencing judge considers the circumstances presented by a defendant convicted of a criminal offense. In each case, the sentencing judge confronts an individual who has no exact counterpart in any defendant previously appearing before the court for sentencing. The sentence imposed is primarily a matter of judicial discretion and is based upon consideration of the nature of the offense, the circumstances surrounding the commission of the offense, and the circumstances of the defendant. The sentencing judge formulates a specific sentence within broad statutory …

Shocking Sentences, John B. Meixner Jr.

Scholarly Works

Harsh recidivist sentencing penalties, like three-strikes laws, have been criticized heavily among both academics and practitioners on a number of different grounds. Most arguments focus on how sentences arising from these penalties are disproportionate—that there is no sensible relationship between the wrong committed and the sentence imposed. Those critiques are valid, but there’s another important problem with recidivist sentencing penalties that has been overlooked: they lead to sentences that are totally unexpected—indeed, shocking—to the defendants who face them. Many recidivist sentencing penalties cause large leaps in sentencing exposure that amount to exponential growth when compared with a defendant’s prior sentences. …

The Twenty-First Century Death Penalty And Paths Forward, Jeffrey Omar Usman

MC Law Review

Today, states are moving closer to another moment of critical decision-making in charting the course of the death penalty in the United States. Unlike the sudden and dramatic immediacy of Furman, however, this moment is arriving through a slower and quieter progression, or perhaps more accurately a deceleration. While not abolished, in many states application of the death penalty is grinding or has ground to a halt. If the status quo holds, the vast majority of defendants who are sentenced to death by the states will instead live out their natural lives in prison for decades dying of old age …

Worthless Checks? Clemency, Compassionate Release, And The Finality Of Life Without Parole, Daniel Pascoe

Northwestern University Law Review

Life without parole (LWOP) sentences are politically popular in the United States because, on their face, they claim to hold prisoners incarcerated until they die, with zero prospect of release via the regularized channel of parole. However, this view is procedurally shortsighted. After parole there is generally another remedial option for lessening or abrogating punishment: executive clemency via pardons and commutations. Increasingly, U.S. legal jurisdictions also provide for the possibility of compassionate release for lifers, usually granted by a parole board.

On paper, pardon, commutation, and compassionate release are thus direct challenges to the claim that an LWOP sentence will …

Problem-Solving Courts And The Outcome Oversight Gap, Erin R. Collins

UMKC Law Review

The creation of a specialized, “problem-solving” court is a ubiquitous response to the issues that plague our criminal legal system. The courts promise to address the factors believed to lead to repeated interactions with the system, such as addiction or mental illness, thereby reducing recidivism and saving money. And they do so effectively – at least according to their many proponents, who celebrate them as an example of a successful “evidence-based,” data-driven reform. But the actual data on their efficacy is underwhelming, inconclusive, or altogether lacking. So why do they persist?

This Article seeks to answer that question by scrutinizing …

Long History Of Leniency? A Call For A Georgia Statutory Mitigation Factor For Veterans With Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Jonathan Fagundes

Georgia Law Review

In Georgia, criminal sentencing marks a critical period for convicted defendants. As the final moment before the superior court fashions a punishment, the defendant faces a pivotal opportunity to introduce mitigating evidence, including evidence of mental health challenges, life circumstances, and other facts. Where such evidence is offered, the superior court can properly issue a sentence that aligns with the purposes of punishment or other state policies. But some populations, especially veterans convicted of nonviolent offenses, are exposed to unique stressors that likely affect their culpability. The existing sentencing regime, however, does not guarantee that this mitigating evidence will even …

Same Crime, Different Time: Sentencing Disparities In The Deep South & A Path Forward Under The Fourteenth Amendment, Hailey M. Donovan

Seattle University Law Review

The United States has the highest incarceration rate of any country in the world. The American obsession with crime and punishment can be tracked over the last half-century, as the nation’s incarceration rate has risen astronomically. Since 1970, the number of incarcerated people in the United States has increased more than sevenfold to over 2.3 million, outpacing both crime and population growth considerably. While the rise itself is undoubtedly bleak, a more troubling truth lies just below the surface. Not all states contribute equally to American mass incarceration. Rather, states have vastly different incarceration rates. Unlike at the federal level, …

Time And Retribution, Meghan J. Ryan

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Time is missing from discussions on the theory of retribution. A colossal body of scholarship has been devoted to exploring the theory of retribution, or 'just deserts," but much less has attempted to translate this theory into practice, explaining how to determine an actual offender's desert in real life. The limited scholarship on this topic touches on who might best assess an offender's desert. For example, should a judge, a juror, or the public itself be making these desert decisions? But there is also a temporal aspect to this decision making that has thus far largely eluded exploration: When should …

A Second Chance At Success: Using “Second Look” Laws To Modify Sentences Of Juvenile Offenders, Sophia M. Adams

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

“Second look” sentencing laws allow incarcerated individuals to petition to have their sentences reexamined and potentially reduced after they have served a significant period of incarceration. This rehabilitative relief is conditioned upon an offender showing that they have made meaningful positive changes while incarcerated and would not pose a threat to their community if released. Implementing second look laws is particularly appropriate in the context of offenders who have committed crimes as juveniles. The U.S. Supreme Court has recognized that juvenile offenders are less culpable than their adult counterparts and psychological science supports this conclusion. This Comment examines and compares …

A Critical Assessment Of The First Step Act’S Recidivism-Reduction Measures, Raquel Wilson

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The First Step Act of 2018 (“FSA”) is the most impactful federal sentencing reform of the past 40 years. While the Act represents a partial resurgence of the rehabilitative model of imprisonment, which had fallen out of favor decades before, it also represents a missed opportunity to fully integrate evidence-based rehabilitation programs for those offenders who pose the greatest risks to public safety.

The public has a strong interest in reducing recidivism, particularly among violent offenders, most of whom will be released from federal prison eventually. The FSA incentivizes participation in evidence-based, recidivism-reducing programs offered by the Bureau of Prisons …

A Democratic Restraint On Incarceration, Marah S. Mcleod

Journal Articles

From the Article

This Article proposes a new sentencing model that employs the democratic voice of the jury to restrain individual injustice and mass incarceration by having the jury establish the maximum term that an individual defendant deserves and confining judicial sentencing discretion within that upper bound.

Showing Mercy Through A Presumption Of Retribution, Marah S. Mcleod

Journal Articles

From the Article

This Essay proposes a path toward the systematic consideration of mercy in American sentencing. America does not have to choose between retributive blame on the one hand and nonjudgmental mercy on the other. Inspired by Whitman's description of the European "presumption of mercy," America can implement a presumption of its own-one that opens the door to the nonarbitrary exercise of mercy, while retaining a clear focus on retributive desert. Such a presumption, tailored to American political realities and moral norms, might be called a "presumption of retribution"-and this presumption could be codified in law while explicitly made …