almediah.fr
» » Sentencing, Judicial Discretion and Judicial Training

Download Sentencing, Judicial Discretion and Judicial Training eBook

by Colin Munro,Martin Wasik

Download Sentencing, Judicial Discretion and Judicial Training eBook
ISBN:
0421460202
Author:
Colin Munro,Martin Wasik
Language:
English
Publisher:
Sweet & Maxwell (December 3, 1992)
Pages:
304 pages
EPUB book:
1484 kb
FB2 book:
1706 kb
DJVU:
1392 kb
Other formats
lrf doc lit azw
Rating:
4.3
Votes:
453


by Colin Munro (Author), Martin Wasik (Author). Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.

by Colin Munro (Author), Martin Wasik (Author).

Sentencing, Judicial Discretion and Training. Colin R. Munro, Martin Wasik. Judicial independence and judicial functions, Colin Munro the judicial role in Northern Ireland, Sean Doran and John D. Jackson providing a legislative framework for sentencing, John D. Jackso. More).

Munro, C. and Wasik, M. (1992) Sentencing, Judicial Discretion and Training, Sweet & Maxwell, London. Newell, A. and Simon, . 1972) Human Problem Solving, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, N. oogle Scholar

Munro, C. oogle Scholar. stberg, . Whitakeer, . and Amick III, B. (1988) The Automated Expert: Technical, Human and Organizational Considerations in Expert Systems Applications, Teldok, Sweden.

We find more judicial discretion and greater racial disparity than is generally found in the literature

We find more judicial discretion and greater racial disparity than is generally found in the literature In this article, application of the . Sentencing Guidelines and changes to the law, limiting and expanding judicial discretion under the Guidelines are analyzed from 1999 to 2006 for a sample of drug trafficking cases. Despite a large number of studies on the impact of the . Sentencing Guidelines and their reform, this is the only recent study that specifically controls for case fact variation so that the effect of the law and reforms can be properly tested.

Includes updated papers from the conference on sentencing, judicial discretion and training held at the University of Manchester in. .Includes bibliographical references and index. Personal Name: Munro, Colin R.

Includes updated papers from the conference on sentencing, judicial discretion and training held at the University of Manchester in 1991. Bibliography, etc. Note: Includes bibliographical references and index. Personal Name: Wasik, Martin. Rubrics: Judicial discretion Sentences (Criminal procedure).

The Need to Curtail Judicial Sentencing Discretion ¶1 Perhaps the most controversial area of sentencing law and practice is fitting the punishment to the crime

The Need to Curtail Judicial Sentencing Discretion ¶1 Perhaps the most controversial area of sentencing law and practice is fitting the punishment to the crime. Due to the enormous number and range of aggravating and mitigating circumstances that have been held to be relevant to sentencing, judges in Australia and the United Kingdom generally enjoy wide discretion in imposing punishment in any particular case. This has resulted in a large amount of disparity in sentencing.

Judicial discretion is the power of the judiciary to make some legal decisions according to their discretion. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, the ability of judges to exercise discretion is an aspect of judicial independence

Judicial discretion is the power of the judiciary to make some legal decisions according to their discretion. Under the doctrine of the separation of powers, the ability of judges to exercise discretion is an aspect of judicial independence. Where appropriate, judicial discretion allows a judge to decide a legal case or matter within a range of possible decisions.

Judicial discretion is necessary to the proper discharge of our Constitutional obligations as a separate – and independent – branch of government. 1 Legislatures simply cannot write laws to address all situations which find their way into court or that develop as a case makes its way through the legal system. From this vantage point a judge must have some discretion to apply the law to the facts and procedure of the pending dispute. The concept of judicial discretion has evolved

Judges are able to determine how many years between minimum and maximum the offender will serve. Indeterminate Sentencing. Judge sets a minimum and maximum sentence.

Judges are able to determine how many years between minimum and maximum the offender will serve. Support of JD. Allows judges to give the best sentence after considering all relevant factors. Punishing offender to avenge a wrong "Eye for an eye".

Glidewell, Lord Justice (1992), ‘The Judicial Studies Board’, in Wasik, M. and Munro, C. (ed., Sentencing, Judicial Discretion and Judicial Training, London: Sweet & Maxwell.

A collection of essays on the operation of the current judicial process, which covers themes ranging from the judicial function, to sentencing policy introduced by the Criminal Justice Act 1991, to the workings of the Judicial Studies Board and its training role.