Indeterminate Sentencing Essay

The purpose of the criminal justice system is to deliver justice for all, by convicting and punishing the guilty, while protecting the innocent. Therefore, sentencing became an individualized tool to maintain the standards of the criminal justice system by distributing fair punishments. Sentencing has evolved through the years, for "the Federal Government, all States, and the District of Columbia had indeterminate sentencing systems" penalizing offenders to a specified term or to a range of years (Mackenzie 6). However, the increase in crime, the evidence that offenders were not being rehabilitated, and the concern that indeterminate sentencing produced unjust disparities led to the Sentencing Reform Act (SRA) of 1984 (Bowman 1322). Reconstructing the method of sentencing was meant to "prevent new crimes; to promote the correction and rehabilitation of the offenders; and to safeguard offenders against excessive,

disproportionate, or arbitrary punishments" (Mackenzie 6). All in all, information about the individual's offense and criminal record indicated an allowable range of sentence length. One would assume that this technique would eliminate racial inequalities that have been present since the 1970's but currently, there's a division between the court system and minorities in regards to sentencing.
The general public once held a high expectation for the court system to resolve disputes and deliver sentences in a manner that remain impartial.

Thus, supporting evidence from the claims of a criminal prosecutor and criminal defense attorney should be the only factors affecting the judicial officer's judgment. However, the imbalance of sentencing, especially between Caucasians and minorities, has implicated that race is a part of the deliberation process. David B. Mustard (2001) notes that "Hispanics receive a sentence of 54.1 months and blacks receive 64.1 months, which are 68.5% and 99.6% larger than the average sentence for whites (296). Based on observation and statistical information, it is important to highlight inequalities in the criminal justice system especially when it's designed to produce outcomes that are just and fair. It takes those in the position of power to recognize these inequalities to make the necessary policy changes to correct racial disparities or restore an imbalance in racial justice (Hurtwitz and Peffley

473).
As previously mentioned, race and sentencing connect with one another since research from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2018) reveal that while Caucasians are the leading population in jail, the population of minorities has progressively increased between 2000-2014. In addition to data revealing that minorities receive longer sentences than Caucasians in the United States. Even though, the court system emphasizes those sentences are race-neutral, data like this leads one to believe there is a relationship between race and sentencing. Addressing this correlation can help start the process to reestablish race-neutral values that the criminal justice system originally put in place.
In place of race as the direct factor for the sentencing disparities in the criminal justice system, one must look into the type of crime a person committed in order to apply this presumption. The relationship between criminal homicide and sentencing will be observed in this study. Apart from race, there is a contributing factor such as the severity of the crime that affects sentencing in the criminal justice. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics (2018), the homicide rate has remained consistent between the years of 1980-2016. In addition to the data backing up that the sentencing rate for this crime remains constant as well (Auerhahn 286). Based on this information, sentences are conditioned by other indirect variables such as the severity of the crime than a person's race/ethnicity.