Stacking punishment: The imposition of consecutive sentences in Pennsylvania

IF 3.5 1区 社会学 Q1 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Criminology & Public Policy Pub Date : 2022-04-25 DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12587
Miranda A. Galvin
{"title":"Stacking punishment: The imposition of consecutive sentences in Pennsylvania","authors":"Miranda A. Galvin","doi":"10.1111/1745-9133.12587","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Research Summary</h3>\n \n <p>This study introduces the decision to impose consecutive sentences as a “window of discretion” in modern sentencing regimes that has the potential to produce extreme and disparate punishment. Among cases sentenced in Pennsylvania between 2015 and 2019, consecutive sentences were present in more than 20% of all cases, including 35% of cases resulting in a primary sentence to prison and 39% of cases resulting in a primary sentence to jail. The length of consecutive incarceration and probation often exceed primary sentence length and substantially extend justice involvement.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Policy Implications</h3>\n \n <p>In the absence of guidance, consecutive sentences undermine policy efforts at uniformity and correctional control. Further, relatively common use of (long) probation tails may contribute to “mass probation.” Such decisions should be deserving of the same consideration as given the imposition of primary sentences, meaning the promulgation of guidance regarding imposition and reasonable limits for length.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":47902,"journal":{"name":"Criminology & Public Policy","volume":"21 3","pages":"567-594"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Criminology & Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1745-9133.12587","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research Summary

This study introduces the decision to impose consecutive sentences as a “window of discretion” in modern sentencing regimes that has the potential to produce extreme and disparate punishment. Among cases sentenced in Pennsylvania between 2015 and 2019, consecutive sentences were present in more than 20% of all cases, including 35% of cases resulting in a primary sentence to prison and 39% of cases resulting in a primary sentence to jail. The length of consecutive incarceration and probation often exceed primary sentence length and substantially extend justice involvement.

Policy Implications

In the absence of guidance, consecutive sentences undermine policy efforts at uniformity and correctional control. Further, relatively common use of (long) probation tails may contribute to “mass probation.” Such decisions should be deserving of the same consideration as given the imposition of primary sentences, meaning the promulgation of guidance regarding imposition and reasonable limits for length.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
累加刑罚:宾夕法尼亚州实行的连续刑罚
本研究介绍了在现代量刑制度中,连续判决作为一个“自由裁量权窗口”的决定,有可能产生极端和不同的惩罚。在2015年至2019年宾夕法尼亚州被判刑的案件中,超过20%的案件是连续判刑的,其中35%的案件被判有期徒刑,39%的案件被判有期徒刑。连续监禁和缓刑的时间往往超过原判的时间,大大延长了司法介入的时间。政策影响在缺乏指导的情况下,连续判决破坏了统一和惩教控制的政策努力。此外,相对普遍地使用(长)缓刑尾巴可能会导致“大规模缓刑”。这种决定应与判处初刑一样得到同样的审议,即颁布关于判处初刑的指导意见和合理的刑期限制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Criminology & Public Policy
Criminology & Public Policy CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
8.10
自引率
6.50%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Criminology & Public Policy is interdisciplinary in nature, devoted to policy discussions of criminology research findings. Focusing on the study of criminal justice policy and practice, the central objective of the journal is to strengthen the role of research findings in the formulation of crime and justice policy by publishing empirically based, policy focused articles.
期刊最新文献
Responding to nonemergency calls for service via video: A randomized controlled trial Issue Information Bail reform and pretrial release: Examining the implementation of In re Humphrey Do foster youth face harsher juvenile justice outcomes? Reinvestigating child welfare bias in juvenile justice processing Short-term evaluation of Cure Violence St. Louis: Challenges, triumphs, and lessons learned
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1