Punishment Flashcards
Two theories of punishment
Utilitarian (forward looking)
Retributive (backward looking)
Four utilitarian goals of punishment
- General Deterrence: Deter the general public from committing the crime
- Specific Deterrence: Deter the same offender from committing another crime
- Rehabilitation: Make the offender better than they were before
- Incapacitation: Keep the offender physically away from society
Concept of Retributivism
We want to punish those who are morally blameworthy (“just deserts”)
Two-part test for determining if a sentence is excessive under the Sentencing Reform Act
- Did the sentencing judge impose conditions for a permissible purpose? (yes if it aligns with any of the four utilitarian goals of punishment)
- Are the conditions reasonably related to the purpose?
Restorative Justice
Starts a dialogue between offender and victims
Provides a space for offenders to be able to articulate their feelings or give an explanation for why they acted the way they did
Healing process for both offenders and victims
Transformative Justice
Focuses on responding to a harm without causing more harm
Gets rid of binary approach (victim and offender)
Looks at the root cause of the behavior, such as community issues
Does not involve the government
Proportionality of punishment
8th Amendment: Prohibits cruel and unusual punishment
Length and severity of punishment cannot be disproportionate to the charge
Retributive view: Proportionality = punishment equivalent to the crime
Two ways to challenge proportionality
- Categorical bans on sentences (Coker v. Georgia) - cannot sentence someone to death if the offender did not take someone’s life; look at present offense, not the context of previous capital offenses when determining whether the offender can be sentenced to death
- Determining if a sentence is excessive given the particular facts of the case (Ewing v. California)
