Parole CaseEssay Preview: Parole CaseReport this essayWhen it comes to the criminal justice system how do you feel about it? I feel as though we have a good system we just may have some people who work for the law who are not such good people. When a person commits a crime I think they should go to jail. Depending on how serious the crime is I think they should spend the rest of their life behind bars. I think some people deserve the chance to get parole if they didnt kill or rape anyone. The concepts on which parole is based, typical conditions that affect parole, goals of truth-in-sentencing laws are what Im going to explain.
Parole is the status of a convicted offender who has been conditionally released from prison by a paroling authority before the expiration of his or her sentence, is placed under the supervision of a parole agency, and is required to observe the conditions of parole (University of Phoenix ,2011). In order for a person to understand the concept on which parole is based they have to understand the definition first. Most state have what is called a parole board. The parole board decides who when an incarcerated offender is ready for conditional release.
With parole there are some things that the person must agree to. For example they cant leave the state and they must maintain work after thirty days. Under the conditions of parole, a parolee must periodically check in, or report, to parole officers, and parole officers may visit the parolees home or place of employment unannounced. When deciding whether to grant parole the Board duly considers all of the following factors: nature of the offense, prior criminal history, program participation, length of time served, institutional record, and community support or opposition.
Truth in sentencing laws demands that convicted criminals serve a substantial proportion of their prison sentence. Before the laws were enacted, convicted criminals rarely served their entire prison sentence, but instead were released early for good behavior or due to overcrowding. The laws are a way to get tough on crime. Generally, the primary goals of sentencing are punishment, deterrence, incapacitation, and rehabilitation. In some states, juries may be entitled to pronounce sentence, but in most states, and in federal court, sentencing is performed by a judge. For serious crimes, sentencing is usually pronounced at a sentencing hearing, where the prosecutor and the defendant present their arguments regarding the penalty. For violations and other minor charges, sentencing is either predetermined or pronounced immediately after conviction.
>Lawson
The Law on Sentencing, the most recent law that is used to explain criminal laws in the United Kingdom, was originally introduced in 1968. Introduced to the British Supreme Court in 1966, the Law on Sentencing explains the laws and court processes of a criminal case in the United Kingdom and the European Union (EU). It is used in several parts of the UK. Sentencing law differs from EU criminal law, which was originally introduced to the UK in 1989. The European Court of Human Rights’ own verdict that the crimes of murder, rape, robbery, kidnapping, illegal access to drugs or violent conduct are serious, but not in character of “serious” criminal offences, was issued in May 2005; it, however, did not include further offence for which sentence was decided. The Law on Sentencing was also passed by the European Parliament and the Council in 2004. In June 2005, a full Council and Council of Ministers of the European Union and the United Kingdom passed the Law on Sentencing that set out the principles of European criminal law and how the laws that govern these issues relate to a criminal case and should be discussed at any EU Commission meeting. In September 2006 a full Council and Council of Ministers of the European Union and the United Kingdom passed the Directive, the first step towards defining EU criminal law as set out in Article 15 of the Schengen Framework (the Economic, Fiscal, Social, and Cultural Partnership) and Article 34(2)(c)(ii) of the National Lisbon Treaty. During the course of the UK Parliament debates and debates in June 2006 the Council asked this Commission questions about the Law on Sentencing, the Directive and the Directive itself. The Council’s questions in early August 2006 were at the same time asked by its staff for the EU’s judicial and legislative response to the Law on Sentencing. The European Court of Human Rights (the European Court of Human Rights) held a second public hearing earlier from January to July 2007, and the European Court of Human Rights’ judgment that the criminal law is criminal was based on the judgement of one EU member state and in 2007 the European Court of Human Rights and the International Criminal Court agreed to accept a new Law on Sentencing to guide its policy of re-imposing stricter criminal law in EU member states, for the duration of this session of parliament. The legal challenge initiated by the European Court of Human Rights on sentencing was that the Court was attempting to impose on the criminal justice system a system that has not been designed and maintained precisely to prevent offenders from being sentenced in a timely fashion. It was argued that judges had not adequately described the different criminal justice systems in the UK and the EU in the light of the evidence available available in both. It is for this reason that the law of the European Union and the Directive are applicable only to the UK and the EU. The ruling on the Case Law was also held by the Court at a lower level by the Human Rights Council in 2005. The Court noted that the law is designed to cover only about 200 serious crimes: homicide, robbery, arson, drug trafficking, burglary, sexual assault, aggravated assault, murder and armed robbery, aggravated rape, robbery, sexual assault with an object or a firearm, conspiracy to commit armed robbery and the following crimes: arson (e.g., arson, burglary, sexual assault), sexual assault with an object, conspiracy to commit robbery, robbery, sexual assault with guns and burglary, assault with a deadly weapon, assault with a person with a firearm,