Fines in the Criminal Justice System

Day fines: asymmetric information and the secondary enforcement system

“…Moreover, this sanction was not merely used to punish minor offenses, but was imposed on offenders committing crimes such as an assault, property crimes, drug offenses, etc. (Albrecht 1991).…”

“…As a result, the offender is the primary source of information regarding his income. Since this is the most vital information for the second step of day-fines, German judges developed relatively uniform estimation of income based on the profession of the offender (Albrecht 1991). The reliance on the offender as the source of information regarding his financial state is not practiced only in Germany, but in other jurisdictions as well (Hillsman 1990).…”

Day fines: A European comparison and Czech malpractice

“…These questions remain unanswered. As other scholars have indicated, criminological research into day fines has been neglected, even though they are the most common form of sanction (Albrecht, 1991; O’Malley, 2009; Lappi-Seppälä, 2014). For example, the Swedish and German ministries of justice have no record of any such studies, according to their responses to freedom of information requests, despite these two countries frequently being referred to as exemplary in the implementation of day fines (Albrecht and Johnson, 1980; Friedman, 1983; Zedlewski, 2010).…”

Sentencing rationales, judicial discretion, and the practice of criminal fines in Israel

“…Although much attention has been paid to the examination of the criminal fine (McDonald et al, 1992;Young, 1999), its administration (Albrecht, 1991), enforcement policies (Ruback & Bergstrom, 2006), and effectiveness (Waldfogel, 1995), one research topic has often been overlooked: the [triple] link between sentencing rationales, judicial discretion, and fining policy. Indeed, even one empirical study that dealt directly with this subject was not identified in the literature.…”