Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
Judges have been granted in recent decades the ability to use discretionary power in the matter of sentencing, regardless of the Guidelines for Sentencing that have become nowadays more and more mere guidelines subject to overruling by federal judges. However, given the abuses that have been registered at this part of the legal process, the legislative branch has taken part of the responsibility and started actions that would somewhat limit the discretionary methodology used by judges in sentencing. Taking into account the fact that there is a wide discrepancy across states in terms of punishments applied for the same criminal act depending on the state, the approach taken by the legislative branch to push forward new means of limiting the authority of the judges in terms of sentencing can be seen as a solution to avoiding discretionary actions and sentencing.
Among practitioners, this discretionary power of the judges is rather well-known and has been the subject of debate for an important part of the 20th century. In this sense, "every time a lawyer in his practice comes across an instance in...
Moreover, "Some social scientists found that that federal sentence disparity prior to reforms of the 1980s was linked to extralegal variables such as the defendant's race/ethnicity, gender, and socioeconomic status" (Albonetti, 2011)
The reforms that have been undergone by the Congress since the early 1980s have aimed at providing clear guidelines related to the way in which sentencing could be done and at the same time limit the discretionary power of the court. Indeed the judge is the supreme authority in a court of law, despite the fact that it has no authority…
References
Albonetti, Celesta A. "Judicial discretion in federal sentencing An intersection of policy priorities and law" in Policy Essay: Racial Disparity in Wake Of The Booker/Fanfan Decision, published in American Society of Criminology, Criminology & Public Policy. Vol.10, Issue 4, available online at http://www.fjc.gov/public/pdf.nsf/lookup/NSPI201210.pdf/$file/NSPI201210.pdf
Isaacs, Nathan. "The Limits of Judicial Discretion" in The Yale Law Journal Vol. 32, No. 4 (Feb., 1923), pp. 339-352, published by: The Yale Law Journal Company, Inc.
This is one of the reasons that the United States Supreme Court has noted the difficulty in distinguishing common crime from the "gray zone of socially acceptable and economically justifiable business conduct. Prosecutors are not eager to 'overcriminalize' and the practice of too readily extending criminal law to areas of which it is not suited is known as "overcriminalization." For these reasons, the statues of white-collar crimes are broad and fuzzy.
Ethics and Discretion in Probation "…Encourage relationships with colleagues of such character to promote mutual respect and cultivate a professional cooperation with each segment…" [and] "respect, serve and empathize with the victims of law violations allegedly committed by children…" (Denton County Juvenile Probation Department) What ethical considerations are important in probation departments in the United States? What are the ethical expectations for communities when there are offenders out from prison and on probation?
Judicial Impropriety in United States Supreme Court A judicial impropriety occurs when a judge disregards existing legal standards expected of him /her when they are discharging their roles during judicial proceedings. For instance, a judge who does not base his or her ruling on the evidence provided and the applicable laws but disregards a defendant while giving undue advantage to the prosecutor or the litigant commits judicial impropriety (Leyland & Anthony,
police officers have discretion when dealing with domestic violence? Answer: YES with qualifications. An in-person survey might work best here because citizens don't all see police as protectors of society; some see them as threats. Discretion is lately recognized as a "necessary evil" according to the police science faculty at North Carolina Wesleyan College (ncwc.edu). Discretion can be put to effective use in a domestic violence situation when it is
Furthermore, there is often a veil of silence from witnesses in these types of assaults, which makes investigation very difficult. However, when an officer exercises the discretion to treat these incidents as lesser-crimes, he reinforces the devaluation of the gang members and actually increases the validity of the gang culture. Furthermore, gang violence does not occur in isolation, and it is unfair to the non-criminal members of gang-afflicted communities
Judicial Interpretation Theory Judges draft no legislation, but they create law nevertheless, through their powers of judicial interpretation. Judges determine the outcome of particular cases by interpreting the meaning of a single phrase, and sometimes, a single word within the applicable statute. By creating legal precedents, jurists sometimes decide entire lines of future cases merely by how they choose to interpret a single word, or to resolve a singe apparent ambiguity