Sentencing, Reform, and the Church
1
Sentencing, Reform, and the Church
When it comes to offenders and the correctional system, there are a lot of things that
come into play to help them and the community feel safe. It all starts with the sentencing; it’s
important to give the offender the appropriate amount of time that seems fair for the crime they
committed; however, are the sentencing guidelines that we have in place working? In this paper,
I will be discussing the pros and cons of indeterminate and determinate sentencing, why we need
to reform our systems, and how the church should be included in the reform process.
Indeterminate Sentencing is punishment imposed by a judge that has both a minimal and
a maximum amount of time (1 to 5 years). In 1840, Captain Maconochie created the “mark
system” which allowed convicts to earn their freedom earlier by hard work and good behavior,
thus creating the indeterminate sentencing (Allen, Latessa, Ponder, 2016, pg. 32). In 1930, most
states and federal courts were operating under this type of sentencing structure; between 1930
and 1974 the American sentencing laws began to undergo fundamental restructuring of the
sentencing process (Allen, Lassiter, and Ponder, 2016, pg. 72).
States that follow the laws associated with indeterminate sentencing hope that by giving
people the chance to participate in rehabilitation, they may be inspired to “get better” so that they
can have a shot at an early release (Legaldictionary.net). This helps to reduce prison and jail
populations, by releasing offenders who have proven themselves to be worthy of release by good
behavior and hard work. Of course, good behavior does not guarantee an early release;
additionally, a prisoner’s criminal history is considered by the parole board, as is the crime that
landed him in jail in the first place (legaldictionary.net).
What this could come off to the public as is the perception that the criminal justice
system is easy on the convicted criminals. With the indeterminate sentencing, it gives the
Sentencing, Reform, and the Church
2
possibility of an early release to even the most serious criminals, which makes a lot of citizens
feel as if the offenders are being released too early. Also, critics of indeterminate sentencing
believe that such a structure gives the parole board too much power (Legaldictionary.net).
Allen, Lassiter, and Ponder (2016) state that “by 2013 majority of the states embraced
determinate sentencing, abolishing discretionary parole release mechanisms in at least sixteen
states and imposing mandatory add-on time for use of guns in crimes, sales of narcotics, and
some especially brutal crimes”. Determinate sentencing is a sentence imposed by a judge with a
fixed term of incarceration with the expectation the inmate will serve the entire amount of time
(minus good time) (Allen, Lassiter, Ponder, 2016, pg. 62). This eliminates the ability of parole
boards releasing an inmate before their sentence has expired (Allen, Lassiter, Ponder, 2016 pg.
77).
