Applying the Classical School in Sentencing Strategies
The Classical School of criminology argues law must achieve balance between fairness and punishment. This school of theories states the law should be only retaliatory enough to dissuade people from breaking the law1. Cesare Beccaria, a Classical theologist, lived during a time when the French monarchy held people indefinitely on unspecified charges, forming his perspective and world view on justice. Beccaria’s belief was that it was better to prevent crime than punish those who commit, but if another person’s individual rights had been infringed upon, retributive justice was still necessary and should be fitting of the crime. Through the work of John Howard, this concept grew further, eventually going on to inspire the United States constitution.
The Classical School could be applied in sentencing strategies by ensuring punishment be inflicted quickly. This ensures that people are not sitting for extended amounts of time awaiting trial and sentencing. It was also argued that it is better to prevent crimes rather than punish the individuals who commit them. I agree; the modern-day equivalent should not focus on punishment. Instead, the Classical School could be better utilized to implement treatment and prevention measures for drug offenders, preventing addiction rather than punishing them after the fact.
How have these sentencing strategies changed the criminal justice response to drug offenders?
First, minimum sentencing strategies removes power from the judges’ hands to hand down a punishment fitting of the crime. Instead, it requires a minimum to be issued to an offender; one in which the judge themselves may disagree with as overly harsh, unnecessary, or even outdated to begin with2. This goes against the school of Classical Theory, preventing punishment from being truly fitting of the crime.
Second, determinate sentencing has created the overpopulation problem in the American criminal justice system. Three strikes laws in particular states, require decades long sentences to be served by offenders and create a “sleeper effect” in which offenders stay and continue to accumulate in the prison system3. Sadly, many of these inmates are serving time on drug offenses.
Sentencing strategies have caused disparity in the offender population in prisons and jails.
Two main issues exist in prison population: imprisonment of non-violent offenders and the numbers of people of color behind bars. Three strikes laws have a higher percentage of non-violent offenders than violent ones; meaning people who may not be a violent threat to society could be behind bars for life. One study found that increased prison stays for non-violent offenses, such as drug offenses, account for 56% of strike prison population while violent strike offenders comprise only 44% 4. Data from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation determines three strikes laws to excessively favor minority groups5. African Americans account for only 6.6% of population in California. Knowing this, deeper examination of the data becomes more alarming. African Americans make up 33.5% of second-strike prisoners and 45.7% of third strikers. Hispanics make up 38.2% of California’s population, and constitute 35% of second and third-strike prisoners. Whites account for 39.4% of California’s prison population and only 24.1% of them are considered strikers.
References
1 Lilly, J. R., Cullen, F. T., & Ball, R. A. (2019). Criminological theory: context and consequences. SAGE Publications, Inc.
2 Mandatory minimums and sentencing reform. (n.d.). https://www.cjpf.org/mandatory-minimums.
3 Travis, J., Western, B., & Redburn, S. (2014). The growth of incarceration in the United States: exploring causes and consequences. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. https://doi.org/10.17226/18613.
4 Brown, B., & Jolivette, G. (2005, October). A primer: Three strikes – the impact after more than a decade. https://lao.ca.gov/2005/3_strikes/3_strikes_102005.htm.
5 Oleson, J. C. (2015). Habitual criminal legislation in New Zealand: Three years of three-strikes. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology, 48(2), 277-292.
🖤 Love what we do? Support Clutch.
