Suspended Sentences in Spain: An Alternative to Prison or a “Bargaining Chip” in Plea Negotiations?

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
pp. 354-378
Author(s):  
Daniel Varona ◽  
Steven Kemp
Keyword(s):  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
The Other ◽  
European Research ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
The One

Abstract Criminal proceedings in many European states are increasingly being resolved via plea bargaining agreements; yet, there is relatively scant European research on the implications for the defendant or the role this practice plays within the criminal justice system. Using a sample of 1417 criminal cases, this paper examines how suspended prison sentences may be utilized in Spain to encourage or coerce defendants into a guilty plea. In addition to more traditional regression analysis, covariates are controlled through an entropy balancing process. The findings show defendants who agree a plea deal are indeed less likely to enter prison, which has profound implications for criminal justice in Spain and beyond. On the one hand, it appears plea bargaining is being used to improve the efficiency of the system and, thus, maintain its very existence. On the other hand, issues regarding false confessions and sentencing disparities are specifically highlighted.

scholarly journals Diversion, Rights and Social Justice

Youth Justice ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 147322542090284 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roger Smith
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Young People ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Children's Rights ◽  
The Other ◽  
Delinquent Behaviour ◽  
Justice Model ◽  
The One

This article draws on historical understandings and contemporary models of diversion in order to develop a critical framework and agenda for progressive practice. The argument essentially revolves around the contention that typically diversionary interventions have been constrained by the contextual and ideological frames within which they operate. They have in some cases been highly successful in reducing the numbers of young people being drawn into the formal criminal justice system; however, this has largely been achieved pragmatically, by way of an accommodation with the prevailing logic of penal practices. Young people have been diverted at least partly because they have been ascribed a lesser level of responsibility for their actions, whether by virtue of age or other factors to which their delinquent behaviour is attributed. This ultimately sets limits to diversion, on the one hand, and also offers additional legitimacy to the further criminalisation of those who are not successfully ‘diverted’, on the other. By contrast, the article concludes that a ‘social justice’ model of diversion must ground its arguments in principles of children’s rights and the values of inclusion and anti-oppressive practice.

Reductivism, Retributivism, and the Civil Detention of Dangerous Offenders

Utilitas ◽  
1997 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-146
Author(s):  
David Wood
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Harm Reduction ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The Other ◽  
Social Harm ◽  
Reduction System ◽  
Dangerous Offenders ◽  
Theories Of Punishment ◽  
The One

The paper examines one objection to the suggestion that, rather than being subjected to extended prison sentences on the one hand, or simply released on the other, dangerous offenders should be in principle liable to some form of civil detention on completion of their normal sentences. This objection raises the spectre of a ‘social harm reduction system’, pursuing various reductivist means outside the criminal justice system. The objection also threatens to undermine dualist theories of punishment, theories which combine reductivist and retributivist considerations. The paper attempts to refute the objection by holding that a wedge can be driven between incapacitation and other reductivist measures, and hints at a possibly new version of dualism in the process.

Back to the Future: The Centrality of Plea Bargaining in the Criminal Justice System

2003 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 133-142
Author(s):  
Milton Heumann
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
Careful Analysis ◽  
Historical Study ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Court Records ◽  
General Ground ◽  
Looking Back

Using Professor George Fisher's wonderful new book, Plea Bargaining's Triumph as a springboard and roadmap for a journey into plea bargaining's past and present status, this brief essay will attempt to build a theory accounting for the centrality of plea bargaining in today's—and tomorrow's—criminal justice system. By looking back, Fisher illuminates the present, and suggests a future for plea bargaining in the disposition of the cases. His analysis ends with “plea bargaining's triumph;” with its emergence as the single most important (and powerful) factor in the disposition of criminal cases. I will applaud, but qualify his arguments and speculate about “plea bargaining's future.” His looking back, led him to conclude that plea bargaining coopted or caused most criminal justice innovations of the past two decades, and that almost anthropomorphically, it emerged victorious. His understanding of the “causes” of plea bargaining's centrality deserves applause along with qualification; his painting of a picture of plea bargaining “victory” is correct, and is fruitfully linked to a future informed by his understanding of a past.First, some general ground rules for what I will and will not do in this essay. I will not systematically or exhaustively summarize Fisher's arguments, nor will I referee the disagreements he surfaced with the respect to the work of many major studies of plea bargaining and its history. Suffice it to say that this is a very careful historical study of the origins of plea bargaining, and that it primarily relies on a very detailed and very, very careful analysis of the court records of Middlesex County, Mass., mostly for cases disposed of in the 19th century. Based on these data, and secondary analyses of data from studies of plea bargaining in other jurisdictions, Fisher builds a theory of the growth of plea bargaining that is sometimes original, always engaging, and inevitably provocative. Though I take issue with some of his arguments, he must be lauded for the care and clarity of his presentation, and for the enormous literature he uses to develop and support his case.

scholarly journals PENERAPAN DIVERSI TERHADAP TINDAK PIDANA ANAK DALAM SISTEM PERADILAN PIDANA ANAK

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Teguh Prasetyo
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The Other ◽  
Best Interests ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Other Hand ◽  
Perpetrators And Victims

<p><strong>Abstract</strong></p><p>This article discusses the application of the crime diversion to children in juvenile criminal justice system. So far in the criminal justice system, punishment for perpetrators of children not create justice the perpertrators and victims. On the other hand also still leaves another problem that was not solved even though the perpetrators have been punished. See the principle of the protection of children especially the principle that the best interest of the child. The cild process is required for settling disputes outside the criminal mecanism or commonly referred to as diversion. Settlement through this diversion is expected to provide a win-win solution tho the cases encountered so as to create fairness both in terms of perpertrators as well as for the victim.</p><p><strong><em>Abstract</em></strong><br />This article discusses the application of diversion in juvenile criminal justice system. So far in the criminal justice system, punishment of juvenile perpetrators of crimes did not create justice for the perpertrators and victims. On the other hand, the system also leaves another problem that has not been solved eventhough the perpetrators have been unished. Noting one of the principles in the protection of children, which is the best interests of the child, criminal cases with children as perpetrators should be settled outside the criminal mechanism generally referred to as diversion. Settlement by way of diversion is expected to create a solution that is balanced so as to create justice for both perpetrators and victims. Nevertheless, the diversion can not be applied to all of the criminal act. Diversion can only be applied in offenses committed by children which are sanctioned by penalty of no more than seven years imprisonment and the offence is not a repetition of crime (recidive).</p>

3. Evidence obtained by illegal or unfair means

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Keane ◽  
Paul McKeown
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Relevant Evidence ◽  
Civil Cases

This chapter discusses the circumstances in which relevant evidence can be excluded, as a matter of law or discretion, on the grounds that it was obtained illegally, improperly, or unfairly. The principles for exclusion of evidence are considered, and exclusion in both civil and criminal cases discussed. In respect of civil cases, discretionary exclusion under the civil procedure rules is discussed. In respect of criminal cases, discretionary exclusion at common law and under statute is discussed. The chapter also considers the circumstances in which criminal proceedings should be stayed as an abuse of the court’s process, where a trial would undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system and bring it into disrepute.

scholarly journals Between Convictions and Reconciliations: Processing Criminal Cases in Kazakhstani Courts

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexei Trochev
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Prison Population ◽  
Power Relationships ◽  
Incentive Structure ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Major Reform ◽  
The Right

Cornell International Law Journal: Vol. 50 : No. 1 , Article 5The criminal justice system in Kazakhstan is full of contradictions: Soviet-era accusatorial bias in pre-trial detention and sentencing goes hand in hand with the pro-defendant bias in closing criminal cases. This paradoxical co-existence of seemingly contradictory biases fits well within the informal power map of the criminal justice system. The major reform—reducing prison population to decrease recidivism and minimize international shaming—was coupled with the more recent drives for closing cases on the basis of reconciliation, the total registration of crimes, and zero tolerance approach to combating crime have been achieved only through the change of the incentive structure in the criminal justice system. The post-Soviet innovation of closing criminal cases of public prosecution based on the reconciliation with the victim of crime has proliferated in Kazakhstan because this matched both the incentives of the key actors in the criminal justice system and demands from private actors who are involved in criminal proceedings. In contrast, other types of public participation, such as jury trials, which implement the right to a fair trial, give teeth to adversarial proceedings, and cultivate judicial independence—requirements of the Constitution of Kazakhstan—have rarely been used because they disrupt existing power relationships within the law-enforcement system.

11. Evidence obtained by illegal or unfair means

2020 ◽  
pp. 320-348
Author(s):  
Adrian Keane ◽  
Paul McKeown
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Common Law ◽  
Civil Procedure ◽  
Public Confidence ◽  
Criminal Proceedings ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Relevant Evidence ◽  
Civil Cases

This chapter discusses the circumstances in which relevant evidence can be excluded, as a matter of law or discretion, on the grounds that it was obtained illegally, improperly, or unfairly. The principles for exclusion of evidence are considered, and exclusion in both civil and criminal cases discussed. In respect of civil cases, discretionary exclusion under the civil procedure rules is discussed. In respect of criminal cases, discretionary exclusion at common law and under statute is discussed. The chapter also considers the circumstances in which criminal proceedings should be stayed as an abuse of the court’s process, where a trial would undermine public confidence in the criminal justice system and bring it into disrepute.

scholarly journals The Formulation Of Community Policing Strategy To Settle Criminal Cases (Within community policing perspective)

2018 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Dody Eko Wijayanto ◽  
Koesno Adi ◽  
Masruchin Rubai
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
Community Policing ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The Other ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Policing Strategy ◽  
A Minor ◽  
National Police

It is stipulated in the Criminal Law that only crime by accusation can be abrogated. On the other hand, common criminal cases must be processed within criminal justice system although it is only a minor legal offense. However, reality shows that minor legal offenses have often been put into a crime trial and community has often reacted against such a practice. This stimulates crime investigators to invent more peaceful ways to settle minor legal offenses although such ways are not acknowledged in criminal laws. Therefore, the Indonesian National Police have searched for a breakthrough to settle minor offenses by applying ADR in the form of penal mediation which puts the formulation of community policing strategy as the leading elementKeywords : Formulation, Community Policing, Settle Criminal

scholarly journals Basis and Practices of Restorative Justice: The Case of the Ethiopian Criminal Justice System

2020 ◽  
pp. 01-11
Author(s):  
Negesse asnake Ayalew
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Restorative Justice ◽  
Justice System ◽  
Sampling Technique ◽  
Plea Bargaining ◽  
Research Approach ◽  
Criminal Cases ◽  
Governmental Institutions ◽  
Document Review

Purpose of the study: The Ethiopian criminal justice system views crime as an offense against the state. and is not allowed the participation of the victim and the community and also win-loss outcome. Scholars have established the concept of restorative justice which views crime as a violation of the relationship among the victims, offenders and community. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to assess the legal and institutional basis and practice of restorative justice in Ethiopia. Methodology: This study employs a qualitative research approach and descriptive research design. The population of this study includes the victims, offenders, criminal justice system components and traditional dispute resolver. Data was collected through document review and the interview of five individuals selected through the purposive sampling technique. The collected data was then analyzed thematically. Main Findings: The results show that different governmental institutions such as the house of federation, peace minster, police, court, general attorney, and reconciliation commission have a legal recognition to apply restorative justice values and principles. Meanwhile, traditional conflict resolution mechanisms and alternative dispute resolution mechanisms have defector recognition to resolve criminal cases. Research limitations/implications: The models of restorative justice in Ethiopia entail compromise, withdrawal of charge, probation, pardon, amnesty, plea bargaining, shuttle diplomacy, suspect rehabilitation and reconciliation based on different laws. Therefore, the house of people representative should enact a comprehensive law on restorative justice. The police and general attorney should create awareness about restorative justice. Novelty/Originality of this study: Restorative justice has many benefits, but the concept itself has not been studied in detail. This study is the first of its kind to examine restorative justice in detail in the context of Ethiopia.

scholarly journals From a Search for Rangatiratanga to a Struggle for Survival - Criminal Justice, the State and Māori, 1985 to 2015. The 2015 JD Stout Lecture

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kim Workman
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Justice ◽  
Criminal Justice System ◽  
Justice System ◽  
The State ◽  
The Other ◽  
Youth Justice ◽  
The One ◽  
The Relationship

In this presentation, I consider not only the relationship between Māori and the state, but the response of key criminal justice agencies to the surge of Māori confidence in the 1970’s and 80’s, and desire to take control of their own destiny – the Māori renaissance as it became known.  How did the Police, the prisons and the youth justice system respond to this call for rangatiratanga?  How easily did it respond to the idea that Māori, far from being passive recipients of the criminal justice system, wanted a piece of the action? How well did the operational reality meld with, on the one hand, the state’s vision of a bicultural nation, and on the other, the Māori vision for a measure of autonomy, a rangatiratanga not realised in any earlier constitutional or political arrangements?

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document