How are sentences for federal, state, and local crimes determined?
Is this process fairly and justly applied to all concerned?
How have reforms affected the process over the last 25 years?
Offering a comprehensive overview of the sentencing process in the United States, How Do Judges Decide? The Search for Fairness and Justice in Punishment explores these questions and more. Author Cassia Spohn first discusses the overall concept of punishment and then analyzes individual aspects of it, including the sentencing process, the responsibility of the judge, and disparity and discrimination in sentencing. This Second Edition offers new information on the impact of sentencing reforms, including recent research and case law, updated statistics in tables and figures, and new boxed highlights.
- Helps students understand patterns in the wide discretion and latitude given to judges when determining penalties within the framework of the U.S. judicial system
- Engages the reader with “Focus on an Issue” sections, which analyze key issues such as gender and sentencing (Ch.4) and the impact of race on sentencing for drug offenses (Ch.5)
- Examines sentencing reforms and their impact, providing students with up-to-date information on how punishment is meted out in U.S. courts.
- Contains boxed excerpts in each chapter from books and articles, with a variety of case studies on topics such as the O.J. Simpson murder trial, judicial surveys, and comparison of sentences in different jurisdictions by gender
- Offers new material on specialty courts and the prosecutor's role in sentencing
- Concludes each chapter with discussion questions
How Do Judges Decide? is an ideal text for upper-division undergraduate and graduate courses on the judicial system, criminal law, and law and society.
Chapter 3: How do Judges Decide?
How do Judges Decide?
Seated at the center of the American criminal process is the trial judge. Robed on a raised bench, attentive but detached, severe but compassionate, involved but disinterested, the judge is the central figure of authority—and mystery—in the mysterious and authoritarian morality play we call criminal justice.
William Spence1 pled guilty to two felonies in the Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri: assault in the first degree and armed criminal action. Spence, who had heard from a friend that Bill Smith had been harassing his girlfriend at the restaurant where she worked, shot Smith five times in the leg with a .38-caliber revolver. Smith was seriously injured. According to Missouri law, assault in the first degree ...