Posted: February 14th, 2023

The Courts and Sentencing

The Courts and Sentencing.
Role of Courts in Sentencing
Immediately after conviction employing plea or after the trial process, the trial court foists a sentence upon the felon. Criminal Justice System prescribes that the trial court has the discretion to impose any punishment by dint of statutory provisions, from the minimum to the maximum. The trial judge shall examine specific mitigating or aggravating factors to establish where along the prescribed spectrum, a criminal’s penalty should fall. Hence the primary mission of courts in the context is awarding the appropriate sentencing as per the statutory provisions(Hester,2017).
Strengths of Courts in Sentencing
The strengths of court sentencing are retribution, rehabilitation and restoration. Retribution aims at punishing the crime since it is fair to do so and as per the society notion of ‘an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth’. Rehabilitation aims at behavioural change for the offenders so that they become productive members of society. Restoration ensures that the offender reforms to a law-abiding life and re-establishment of the damage caused to the community.
Weaknesses of Court Sentencing
There are three main weaknesses of court sentencing. First, the slow process of trial and hearing of cases since courts are overwhelmed with many cases ‘backlog of cases’. A large number of offenders are unable to get legal representation due to the minimal amount of public defenders and or financial constraints. Lastly, there is a limited number of judicial officers-judges and magistrates to deal with the ever-increasing criminal matters in various state jurisdictions.

Impacts of Strengths expressed.
There are impacts for retribution, rehabilitation and restoration. They epitomize the importance of court sentencing, and as a result, the offender’s rights shall be protected once they are in correctional centres. Secondly, since restoration is procedural and gradual, the offenders, are reunited with the society, and this prevents any form of discrimination of offenders. Thirdly upon rehabilitation, restorative justice provides a platform for peacemaking and problem-solving in community.
Impacts of Weaknesses expressed.
Litigants and offenders, in most cases, feel prejudiced by the weaknesses expressed by the court sentencing process. Since the process is usually slow, the main impact will be the delay of justice for parties that intent to appeal or close cases. Secondly, since there is a large number of offenders that remain incarcerated due to lack of bail or legal representation, there will be an increased population in prisons and cell. The large number, as a result, calls for alternative means of dispute resolution and or making legal services affordable.
Possible Solutions to the Weaknesses
A feasible solution towards ensuring fair and procedural sentencing would be the formation of quasi-judicial bodies for some criminal matters. These quasi-judicial bodies shall handle misdemeanours so that complicated and capital offences are placed before the trial court. If the parties feel that they are not satisfied with the decisions imposed by the subordinate body, then the parties or instead accused persons shall institute a claim to the standard trial court. Another solution would be to facilitate courts with more judicial offers to handle a large number of cases.
Applicability of the solutions expressed.
The use of subordinate courts, as above mentioned eases the flow of cases in courts. The use of subordinate bodies, as a result, will prevent a backlog of matters; hence justice would be served efficiently. Further, since it handles misdemeanour cases, it will provide the right avenue for negotiations and out of court settlement. Most of the backlog is a result of neglected misdemeanour cases, hence application of the doctrine out of court settlement would be a long term solution.

Conclusion
Courts aim towards fair sentencing as above expressed, and this must include procedural means and respect to statutory provisions. As much as there exit weaknesses in court sentencing processes, enforcing new trends to fit the expanding numbers would remedy that. However, the same ought to be guided by the said provisions in the criminal justice system to attain the much-needed sanity in the Criminal Justice System.

References
Hester, R. (2017). Judicial rotation as centripetal force: Sentencing in the court communities of South Carolina. Criminology, 55(1), 205-235.