NCJ Number
102005
Journal
Justice Quarterly Volume: 3 Issue: 2 Dated: (June 1986) Pages: 215-229
Date Published
1986
Length
15 pages
Annotation
This article argues that criminal sentencing should not be distorted to serve general social goals ('good works') no matter how noble the sentencing seems to the judge or how much the judge thinks the community might endorse it.
Abstract
There is doubt that creative sentencing is efficacious in reducing incarceration levels, but in the long run that issue is not as important as whether certain freedoms are unduly abused by alternative sentencing practices. Orders of restitution, without full judicial hearing on the loss, represent an obvious danger of injustice. Less obvious is the danger abiding in community service orders where the awesome power of the State compels 'good works.' Regardless of whether it is true, we assume that the consensus of society supports the criminal law and its enforcement. We can make no similar assumption in regard to the tremendous number of social causes, ideological perspectives, and 'good works' which a sentencing judge might directly support through the sentencing power. The discussion considers moral entrepreneurship in various criminal justice contexts, including probation, parole, diversion, clemency, and juvenile justice. (Author abstract)