The prosecution of environmental offences in New Zealand

This paper will examine the background law regarding environmental offences under the Resource Management Act 1991 (NZ), prosecution trends, sentencing for RMA offences (including principles of sentencing, sentencing discretion, legislative guidance, appellate guidance, guideline judgments, and tariffs), the use of costs in conjunction with sentencing, recent appeal judgments, and finally draw conclusions regarding consistency and sentencing in relation to environmental offences. Where relevant comparisons will be made with the Australian jurisdictions

Should Death Be So Different?: Sentencing Purposes and Capital Jury Decisions in an Era of Smart on Crime Sentencing Reform

We are in an era of “Smart on Crime” sentencing reform. Several states and the federal government have made major changes to their sentencing policies—from reducing the incarceration of low-level, nonviolent drug offenders to the use of evidence-based sentencing to focus the most severe punishments on those who are at the greatest risk of recidivism. Often, today’s reform efforts are spoken about in terms of being fiscally responsible while still controlling crime. Though such reform efforts do not explicitly acknowledge purposes of punishment—such as retribution, incapacitation, rehabilitation, or deterrence—an undercurrent running through all of these reforms is an effort for sentencing to make sense in light of sentencing goals given the resources available. Therefore, thinking about ultimate purposes or goals in sentencing is necessarily a part of the sentencing reform discourse

Fifteen Years after the Federal Sentencing Revolution: How Mandatory Minimums Have Undermined Effective and Just Narcotics Sentencing Perspectives on the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Mandatory Sentencing

Federal criminal sentencing has changed dramatically since 1988. Fifteen years ago, judges determined if and for how long a defendant would go to jail. Since that time, changes in substantive federal criminal statutes, particularly the passage of an array of mandatory minimum penalties and the adoption of the federal sentencing guidelines, have limited significantly judicial sentencing power and have remade federal sentencing and federal criminal practice. The results of these changes are significantly longer federal prison sentences, as was the intent of these reforms, and the emergence of federal prosecutors as the key players in sentencing. Yet, at the same time, average sentence length appears to be falling slowly as judicial tendency to use the authority granted in the United States Sentencing Guidelines (the Guidelines ) to mitigate sentences through downward departures appears to be increasing

Principles, Pragmatism, and Politics: The Evolution of Washington State’s Sentencing Guidelines

Although the U.S. Federal Sentencing Guidelines have received much attention (and criticism), we do well to remember that the United States is a federal system, and that each of the fifty states has its own sentencing rules and procedures. Today, roughly half of the states have sentencing commissions that issue guidelines -which are generally similar to the federal guidelines in form but different in structure and content. This article examines the history and operation of sentencing in Washington state, an early leader in the development of sentencing guidelines in the United States

Politics and Strategy in Judicial Decision-Making: Evidence from federal human trafficking sentencing

This thesis investigates the effects of judicial ideology and judge characteristics on sentencing in human trafficking cases. Despite research on federal prosecutions of human trafficking, almost nothing is known about sentencing for federal human trafficking offenders. Previous research on sentencing has been limited by the lack of data linking judges to specific sentencing decisions. Using new data that matches judges to defendants convicted of federal human trafficking offenses, I observe that judicial ideology has an effect on overall sentence length—but only for district court judges appointed by Democratic presidents. I also find that partisan composition of the circuit court, rather than ideology of the sentencing judge, affects the likelihood of downward departures from the Sentencing Guidelines. When Democrat-appointed judges make up a majority of the circuit court, district court judges are 2.1 times as likely to depart below the Sentencing Guidelines. These findings confirm positive political theories of sentencing that model judges as strategic decision makers within a "judicial hierarchy."Undergraduate Research ScholarshipNo embargoAcademic Major: PhilosophyAcademic Major: Political Scienc

Towards the Second Founding of Federal Sentencing

In 1987, the Nation’s first attempt to standardize federal sentencing came in the form of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Following United States v. Booker, however, the Guidelines project began bending, and today it is now all but broken, besieged by complexity, undue severity, and the very disparities that it was designed to limit. This Article responds to this crisis by establishing the blueprint for an alternative federal sentencing model. Under this proposal, sentencing determinations would be based on statutory grades and unweighted aggravating and mitigating factors. This approach brings coherence to the purposes of punishment and, by deemphasizing quantitative determinations, promises increased judicial discretion and greater opportunities for counsel to influence sentencing. To demonstrate this system’s simplicity and workability, this Article applies the system to actual federal cases

Criminal History Enhancements Sourcebook

Criminal history scores make up one of the two most significant determinants of the punishment an offender receives in a sentencing guidelines jurisdiction. While prior convictions are taken into account by all U.S. sentencing systems, sentencing guidelines make the role of prior crimes more explicit by specifying the counting rules and by indicating the effect of prior convictions on sentence severity. Yet, once established, criminal history scoring formulas go largely unexamined. Moreover, there is great diversity across state and federal jurisdictions in the ways that an offender's criminal record is considered by courts at sentencing. This Sourcebook brings together for the first time information on criminal history enhancements in all existing U.S. sentencing guidelines systems. Building on this base, the Sourcebook examines major variations in the approaches taken by these systems, and identifies the underlying sentencing policy issues raised by such enhancements.The Sourcebook contains the following elements:A summary of criminal history enhancements in all guidelines jurisdictions;An analysis of the critical dimensions of an offender's previous convictions;A discussion of the policy options available to commissions considering amendments to their criminal history enhancements;A bibliography of key readings on the role of prior convictions at sentencing

Ethnic Disparities in Sentencing and the Washington Sentencing Reform Act: The Case of Yakima County

An important issue confronting the criminal justice system is sentencing disparity. Sentencing disparity involves inequitable sanctions imposed on individuals who have committed similar offenses. These inequalities in sentencing patterns have allegedly centered on group differences and may reflect an ethnic or racial bias

Conceptions and representations of the sentencing decision process

This article attempts to reflect on the success of attempts by academic research to understand and explain the sentencing decision process. It identifies conventional themes in the conception and representation of that decision process and argues that there are some important difficulties associated with them and consequently implications for both the findings of sentencing research and for approaches to sentencing reform. The article suggests a possible alternative approach to conceptualizing and representing the sentencing decision process and also raises questions about the nature of the discretionary (legal) decision process more generally

Restorative Justice: Theory, Processes, and Application in Rural Alaska

An exploration of the principles behind using restorative justice as an alternate form of sentencing in criminal cases, with a focus particularly on how restorative justice might be of benefit in rural Alaska. Includes a bibliography. A sidebar, "Restorative Justice Programs and Sentencing", looks at amendments to Alaska Rules of Criminal Procedure 11(i) and Delinquency Rules 21(d)(3) and 23(f) which describe the requirements for referral to a restorative justice program as part of the sentencing process.[Introduction] / Restorative Justice / Restorative Processes / Victim-Offender Mediation / Conferencing / Circles / Restorative Processes in Rural Alaska / Conclusion / SIDEBARS / Restorative Justice Programs and Sentencing / Change to Alaska Criminal Rule 11 / Restorative Justice ReferencesYe