Although there is an extensive literature on sentencing disparities in common law countries, there have been only a few empirical studies in continental countries and virtually none in post-communist ones. This article presents findings from the Czech Republic, which show that there are important disparities in post-communist Europe, comparable to those in the USA before the introduction of sentencing guidelines. I employ a multi-level modelling approach to study the sentencing practices in Czech district courts for the three most common offences. The values of intra-cluster correlation are found to be between .066 and .178 for the various models, which is considered high. The specifics of civil law post-communist countries are further discussed in relation to choosing appropriate ways of reducing disparities.

Purpose: Sentencing has been shown to be influenced by different extralegal factors. Following psychological research into the various effects the weather can have on mood and two studies claiming finding an influence of weather on sentencing, we examine the extent to which the weather may influence sentencing.Methods: Using sentencing decisions from twelve district courts in Prague in the period 2011-2015 and multilevel modelling techniques, we explore the impact of temperature, wind speed, sunshine, precipitation, barometric pressure and humidity on the decision to incarcerate and the duration of non-suspended prison sentences.Results: In line with the inconclusive findings in the psychological literature on weather and mood and contrary to previous two studies finding the link between weather and sentencing, we do not find that the weather has any substantial impact on sentencing decision making.Conclusions: We conclude that no meaningful unwarranted disparities in sentencing are caused by the weather in Prague, Czech Republic.

No abstract

Sentenced offenders who re-offend prior to serving their previously imposed sentence (multiple conviction offenders) are situated between multiple and repeat offenders. This article examines how they should be sentenced based on censure, consequentialist and desert theories. I conclude that these aims cannot be achieved if they are treated as repeat offenders, and neither can the requirement of proportionality. Censure is, similarly, communicated primarily via hard treatment not via sentence pronouncement. I further analyse all continental European penal codes; half of them do not have any provision governing the sentencing of multiple conviction offenders (tacitly treating them as repeat offenders) and only two countries provide detailed sentencing guidance. I conclude by offering recommendations for the principled sentencing of multiple conviction offenders.

Day fines are an expression of equality for rich and poor alike. Although the theoretical concept of day fines (also called unit or structured fines) has been thoroughly studied, there has not been any empirical study examining the link between the amount of one day fine and the wealth of an offender, to establish whether or not day fines in reality create equality between offenders with different levels of wealth. This paper reports a study conducted in the Czech Republic, which suggests that the concept of day fines does not function without a clear formula specifying how day fines should be calculated. A comparison of all states in Europe that use day fines indicates that only two states have such a formula. The other 20 states have no formula, and thus their propensity for misusing day fines may be high. Several other characteristics of day fines, such as the number of day fines issued and the conversion rate at which unpaid fines are transformed into days in prison, are also discussed.