One of the key challenges of the criminal justice system is attaining their key goals and objectives. The role of criminal justice is to combat crime by punishing the offenders through incarceration and other forms of sentencing. There are various methods which are applied to avert an increase in crime. The criminal justice system employs these methods to ensure that the issue of crime is effectively addressed. Incarceration and imposition of harsh penalties to the offenders are some of the measures which have been adopted by the criminal justice and it is adopted globally as an effective strategy of deterring crime. However, there is a need to implement the current procedures so as to meet the future changing needs (Gardner, n.d). The criminal justice system has growingly deliberated on implementing various sentencing models. This is based on the need to evaluate the all sentencing models to ascertain the kinds of models that are valid and effective in aiding the criminal justice system to attain their primary objectives (Mackenzie, 2001). The aim of evaluating sentencing models is to ascertain a model that has positive contributions on correctional procedures and addresses the current needs.
There are various sentencing models. Determinate sentencing model is a form of prison sentence whereby a person is sentenced to serve for a fixed period of time without a parole. Indeterminate sentencing on the other hand is a form of prison sentence where a person is incarcerated for a minimum term which can be determined by either credits or parole (Portman, 2016). However, in indeterminate sentencing, the release date is always unpredictable. The issue of sentencing models has been a subject of debate in recent years based on a decline in popularity, and effectiveness of indeterminate sentencing model. By evaluating both models, it is evident that the validity of indeterminate sentencing model is under intense scrutiny (Portman, 2016).
The analysis of both sentencing models clearly shows that there are a lot of disparities that exists. Such disparities may put the integrity of the criminal justice system in jeopardy. In this respect, the role of the criminal justice is to ensure that there is justice for all and that all correctional procedures are handled procedurally. It is for this objective that the criminal justice system must adopt specific correctional measures to curb disparities and discrimination. The proponents of determinate sentencing argue that it has positive contribution on criminal justice system by ensuring that there is unity and parity in all the correctional procedures. A determinate sentencing plays a key role in ensuring that there is uniformity in correctional procedures handled by the criminal justice system. However, this is not the case when it comes to indeterminate sentencing model. The indeterminate sentencing model is discretionally in nature and it contributes to a lot of disparities when it comes to justice delivery. It has negative contribution simply because it influences correctional ideologies and as a consequence harsh, lenient or unfair judgments may be delivered unnecessarily. The major goal of correctional procedures is for rendering deterrent effects. Based on what it has been observed about this model, it is clear that it has failed in aiding the criminal justice system to attain their objectives.
Several criminal justice experts have argued that there is a huge difference between determinate and determinate sentencing especially when it comes to efficiency. Based on analysis and its negative influence, it is clear that indeterminate sentencing is ineffective and may not be applicable in the future of criminal justice system (Gardner, n.d). The model may not also aid the criminal justice system to combat future challenges. The current sentencing procedure should be implemented in a manner that correctional processes may be applicable for different kinds of crime and it provides effective solution in combating such crimes (Mackenzie, 2001). The major objective of the determinate sentencing model is to aid the criminal justice system to attain this parity. By ensuring that there is functional equality, the criminal justice system would ensure that their correctional procedures conform to required standards and that it guarantees fairness for all the people. Based on evaluation, analysis and observation over a certain period of time, it is clear that indeterminate sentencing has various shortcomings in the criminal justice system. This model has failed that ensure that there is uniformity when it comes to correctional and sentencing processes. As a consequence, there is a need for the adoption of determinate sentencing procedure in order to address the current issues in criminal justice system.
In conclusion, there is a need for criminal justice system entities to conduct research and analysis of their current and emerging issues in respect to crime prevention. This would enable them to implement their procedures to ensure that it provides solution to currently existing problems. Also, an analysis and effectiveness of the sentencing models that are currently applied should be conducted. The criminal justice system should do away with the models that are not effective and negatively influences correctional procedures. In this case, the two models discussed in this paper must be evaluated to ascertain their efficacy and validity.
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can order our professional work here.