Sentencing the people who have been found guilty of grave crimes may not really be as easy as some people may think.
In fact, sentencing may be considered a complicated process, as what a Los Angeles criminal lawyer will tell you.
The Sentencing Act is the main guide of judges in terms of the kind and length of the sentence to be imposed upon the guilty person. More often than not, the only sure thing written in The Sentencing Act is the ‘maximum.’
There are a few objectives that every sentence given to criminals has to be able to meet. These objectives of sentencing which may be explained well by a Los Angeles criminal attorney are the punishment to be given to the guilty person, the criminal’s deterrence in terms of offending again, and procedures for the criminal to reform or rehabilitate.
All judges must see to it that there is a balance among the above-mentioned sentencing objectives. One example may be the fact that the more lenient the process of sentencing is, the greater the focus on reform. On the other hand, the greater the weight of the sentence, the more it is geared towards the deterrence of the guilty party.
One can say that the process of sentencing may not really be seen as exact or precise.
There is really no assurance that the sentencing process in a specific case is really the most appropriate one. What is more important, however, is that the sentence that was imposed is able to meet the objectives and rules found in The Sentencing Act.
Judge A may come up with a different sentencing result as compared to Judge B. The difference does not mean though that the sentence given is erroneous. For as long as sentencing is done within the stated ranges, people do not have to view the result as a mistake. A Los Angeles criminal lawyer may shed light on the matter.
Though some people may be upset with an imperfect sentencing process, it is a must for the public to realize and accept the true nature of sentencing.