Indeterminate sentence was once the norm in every state, as well as in federal courts. Although most crimes carried a maximum penalty, judges were able to choose from a variety of choices, including imprisonment, probation, and fines. Indefinite punishment has caused a lot of discussion, and it has both advantages and disadvantages that should be considered.
The fundamental benefit of this system is that it helps offenders get back on their feet. The purpose of this method is to properly rehabilitate persons back into society, taking into account that everyone has their own needs and that they must be different for everyone (Ashworth & Zedner, 2019). Second, under indeterminate sentencing, prisoners can be released early and live their lives as free people provided they regularly prove good behavior (Ashworth & Zedner, 2019). Furthermore, everything is taken into account when determining an individual’s sentence, not just the offense itself (Ashworth & Zedner, 2019). Things like criminal background and behavior while incarcerated will cause into rehabilitation efforts to assess whether a person deserves to be free.
On the other hand, one of the major downsides of the indeterminate system is that it gives the parole board much too much power, which can lead to discriminatory rulings. Minorities have traditionally faced harder decisions than non-minorities, as shown by prior experiences (Ashworth & Zedner, 2019). The parole boards’ choices were often influenced by connections. Second, a criminal who fully comprehends the system can get freedom via sheer deception. He might earn an early release if he behaves correctly while in prison and demonstrates that he is willing to be a decent citizen outside (Ashworth & Zedner, 2019). However, if he lied about everything, this early release will just release a criminal into society because of the weaknesses in indeterminate punishment.
Everyone has the right to appeal to one of three courts. There are some distinctions between these three appellate courts that are worth considering. The authority that each court possesses is one of the most significant variances. Supreme Courts have more power than conventional trial or appellate courts, with the United States Supreme Court wielding the most power of all. The Supreme Court has the authority to check the appellate court’s rulings. A person’s first court of appeal is an ordinary appellate court. This court has the power to support or overturn the trial decision.
Reference
Ashworth, A., & Zedner, L. (2019). Some Dilemmas of Indeterminate Sentences. Predictive Sentencing: Normative and Empirical Perspectives, 127.