Have you ever watched the news or read an online article and wished a defendant received a tougher sentence? Criminal punishment is a sentence a defendant could face once he or she was convicted of a criminal act. Criminal sentences vary from incarceration to fines.
In recent years, more focus has been on alternative sentencing. An alternative sentence gives a judge more options than the typical jail, fines or probation. Alternative sentencing include work furloughs, electronic monitoring, and community service.
Alternative sentencing is a way to relieve the overcrowded criminal justice system. Traditional criminal punishment often don’t give victims or the general public the satisfaction of a defendant getting a “deserved” punishment.
Creative Sentencing
Crime and punishment should be a little creative to really drive home the point that criminal acts are wrong. Creative sentencing is a form of alternative sentencing. Creative sentencing differs from a traditional sentence and alternative sentencing in that it is often tailored to the criminal act committed. The sentence "drives home" the point to the defendant.
The problem with creative sentencing is that it can go too far and violate the Eighth Amendment, which prohibits cruel and unusual punishments. An example of cruel punishment is sentencing a defendant to death for a theft conviction. Another problem is the punishment may not be unfair. A creative sentence can’t be too unusual that it doesn’t fit the crime. However, a punishment must be both cruel and unusual to violate the Eighth Amendment.
Is Judge Michael Cicconetti’s Creative Sentences Fair?
In the upcoming blogs, we are going to take a look at creative sentencing by looking at the criminal sentences of Ohio Judge Michael Cicconetti. In some people’s opinion, he may be the most creative judge in the history of the criminal justice system. He offers convicted defendants a chance at a personal punishment rather than a traditional or typical alternative sentence.
For example, in 2013, Judge Cicconetti offered Jonathan Tarase a creative sentence. Tarase was convicted of drunk driving. He was arrested after allegedly injuring a husband and wife when he failed to yield at a stop sign.
Tarase faced the traditional criminal punishment of five days in jail. Cicconetti offered another option. According to the judge, he thought of the sentence after the victim testified. During the testimony, she showed him pictures of the wrecked car. Tarase could complete a three-day alcohol treatment course and view the bodies of fatal accident victims.
Tarase chose to avoid jail.
The punishment did fit the crime when you consider the judge’s reasoning. Tarase didn’t kill anyone, but he could have. The judge wanted to drive home the point of what drinking and driving could really do—what Tarase could’ve done.
Did the punishment violate Tarase’s Eighth Amendment rights? No. The sentence wasn't cruel in any context. While it was a little different from traditional criminal sentences, spending time in an alcohol treatment course is not unheard of and viewing bodies of victims is related to the DUI involved.
Is it Fair for Judge Cicconetti to Make These Offers?
A judge has a lot of sentencing options as discussed. The hidden issue is: should the Ohio judge be making these deals with defendants. They’ve been convicted of a crime. They didn’t choose the first and most correct option—not to commit the crime at all. It’s not fair for them to get to choose their sentence.
Many judges just sentence the defendant to the alternative or traditional sentence, not ask them. For some people, a defendant having a choice of between punishments is going too far. Of course, a person would choose the alternative to jail, even if they had to view bodies in a morgue.
An In-Depth Look Into Judge Cicconetti’s Creative Sentences
The judge has made a lot of creative sentences. Here is a short list:
- A teenager, who played music too loud, to sit alone in the woods in silence
- A man convicted of shouting obscenities at the police and calling them pigs to stand among real pigs for two hours
- A woman, convicted of animal abuse for abandoning a litter of kittens, agreed to sleep in a park without shelter or a blanket for one night.
In the next blog we’ll look at if it was OK for the judge to sentence a girl to walk 30 miles.
Authored by Taelonnda Sewell, LegalMatch Legal Writer
Comments