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

Einat, Tomer

doi:10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2008.07.007

Cited by 6 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Taken together, these findings suggest that future research should examine judges’ reasons for imposing economic sanctions, especially in juvenile cases. Studies in Australia (McFarlane and Poletti, ) and Israel (Einat, ) have examined judges’ rationales for imposing economic sanctions, but the U.S. context likely differs in important ways. For example, fines in the United States are less likely than those in Europe to be determined primarily by offense seriousness and the offender's daily income (Harris, Evans, and Beckett, ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Juvenile Economic Sanctions

Haynes

Cares

Ruback

2014

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Research SummaryEconomic sanctions, particularly restitution, can help juvenile offenders both learn the extent of the harm they caused and assume responsibility for repairing that harm. If that assumption is true, then restitution should be imposed in every case for which it is appropriate, other factors should not affect imposition, and paying restitution should be negatively related to recidivism. This analysis of 921 juvenile cases in five Pennsylvania counties found that restitution was imposed in only 33% of cases for which it was appropriate, whereas fees were imposed in 66% of cases. Consistent with expectations, restitution was more likely to be imposed for property offenses, but contrary to expectations, restitution was more likely to be imposed for felonies and for males. Judges were less likely to revoke the sentences of juveniles who paid a greater percentage of their total economic sanctions and of juveniles whose violation of sentencing conditions was for nonpayment of economic sanctions. Policy ImplicationsGiven that support for both punitive and progressive policies exists, policy makers have a unique opportunity to pursue alternatives, like economic sanctions, that appeal to both perspectives. Economic sanctions are particularly important for juveniles because they are less likely to interfere with other financial obligations (in large part because juveniles have fewer financial obligations than do adults) and because they avoid the Juvenile Economic Sanctions stigma associated with more punitive sentences, such as incarceration. The negative relationship between payment of economic sanctions and recidivism, found in this study and in other studies, also suggests that, in both the short and the long term, economic sanctions are more cost-effective. Furthermore, the restorative aspect of economic sanctions, particularly restitution, suggests that policy makers should consider how best to impose and collect economic sanctions, as they also are consistent with efforts to improve the treatment of crime victims.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Juvenile Economic Sanctions

Haynes

Cares

Ruback

2014

Criminology & Public Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Because a small number of offenders repeatedly commit crimes, it can be concluded that these offenders have high LSI-R scores. Therefore, emphasizing the importance of risk assessment and having an accurate tool (Einat 2008).…”

Section: Criminal Historymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Fines are often accompanied by one or more other sanctions (DeLisi and Conis 2013). Financial sanctions are highly regarded because they are easy and cost efficient to administer and do not require additional criminal agencies to enforce (Klein 1997;Goldblatt and Lewis 1998;Einat 2008), they generate revenue for the state and local government (Butterfield 2004;Einat 2008), and the emergence of broken windows policing has law enforcement focusing on low level violations that without fines, would go unenforced (Atkinson 2015). Further, fines are compatible with dessert-based sentencing and are considered to be a humane punishment.…”

Section: Court-ordered Monetary Sanctionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Further, fines are compatible with dessert-based sentencing and are considered to be a humane punishment. They can be scaled to the severity of the specific offense, as well as the criminal history and income of the specific offender (Uglow 1995;Einat 2008). As Rusche and Kirschheimer (1939:169) stated, "the fine costs the state nothing while procuring the maximum penal effect.…”

Section: Court-ordered Monetary Sanctionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some researchers argue that the difficulties involved in collection will force some offenders to commit another offense to pay their monetary sanctions (Clark 1998;Einat 2004;Einat 2008). McLean and Thompson (2007:22) also discuss difficulties surrounding fine collection, "such a situation could inadvertently encourage a person to return to the behavior and illegal activities that resulted in the person's incarceration in the first place.…”

Section: Ability To Paymentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The debt prison: The effect of court-ordered monetary sanctions on recidivism

Tostlebe

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Crime and Punishment inIsrael

Beker¹,

Einat²

2015

The Encyclopedia of Crime and Punishment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The temporal context for understanding crime in Israel mostly relates to the intercorrelation between immigration and delinquency and revolves around the continuing effort of the Zionist movement to encourage Jewish immigration and settlement in Israel (“Aliyah”), as an attempt to establish the permanent Jewish character of the state. This effort resulted in several big waves of organized and private immigration of diaspora Jews from all across the globe since Israel's formation in 1948. Additionally, and in contrast to this state‐encouraged Jewish immigration, a relatively large and mostly illegal mass of non‐Jewish African immigrants has arrived in Israel from various African states since the beginning of the twenty‐first century. Confronting immigration, physical, cultural, and societal hardships, tackling the complexity of living in geographical and socioeconomical periphery, and facing suspicion, and sometimes hostility, these three immigration groups have presented a varied range and ratios of criminal activity patterns. With regard to Israel's punitive philosophy and policy – the state of Israel is characterized by a complex penal system that seeks to achieve punitive equity between offenders and combines retributive, desert, deterrence, compensatory, and rehabilitative objectives. Paradoxically, however, the Israeli penal eclectic philosophies barely affected the sanctioning policy. Specifically, the percentage of offenders sanctioned to a prison sentence rose significantly and the percentage of criminals sentenced to community‐based sanctions remained stable or slightly declined. Thus, although the concept of developing and improving a system of alternative sanctions was accepted by many Israeli scholars and policy makers as a rational method of assigning resources, reducing crime rates, and rehabilitating as well as deterring offenders in less intrusive settings, it has not been well elaborated and executed.

show abstract

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

Cited by 6 publications

References 31 publications

Juvenile Economic Sanctions

Juvenile Economic Sanctions

The debt prison: The effect of court-ordered monetary sanctions on recidivism

Crime and Punishment inIsrael

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About