Aggravating Circumstances: The Criminal Justice Today

Words: 1550
Pages: 7

1. Aggravating Circumstances - The Criminal Justice Today textbook defines the term aggravating circumstances as "circumstances relating to the commission of a crime that make it more grave than the average instance of that crime" (Schmalleger 346). These circumstances call for a tougher sentence and may include especially heinous behavior, cruelty, injury to more than one person, and so on. Additionally, these circumstances are known to increase the seriousness or outrageousness of a given crime, which will increase the wrongdoer's penalty or punishment. It should also be noted that this term is known as an accompanying or accessory condition, event, or fact that increases the culpability or liability of an accused. Aggravating circumstances, …show more content…
Recognition of particular aggravating circumstances varies by jurisdiction" (Law.cornell.edu). An example of a felony that includes aggravating circumstances includes aggravated assault, which is a physical attack made worse because it is committed with a dangerous weapon and results in severe injury, or is made in conjunction with another serious crime. Specific examples of factors that are considered aggravating circumstances, which result in increased penalties upon conviction include; the age of the survivor, relationship between perpetrator and survivor, use or threat of use of violence, if the survivor suffered mental or physical injury as a result of the assault, multiple perpetrators or accomplices, use or threat of use of weapons, if the survivor is physically or mentally impaired, and multiple acts of sexual …show more content…
Just Deserts - The textbook definition of the term just deserts is "a model of criminal sentencing that holds that criminal offenders deserve the punishment they receive at the hands of the law and that punishments should be appropriate to the type and severity of the crime committed" (Schmalleger 341). Today, retribution correspond to the just deserts model of sentencing, which holds that offenders are responsible for their crimes. When they are convicted and punished, they are said to have gotten their "just deserts." The primary sentencing tool of the just deserts model is imprisonment, but in extreme cases capital punishment becomes the ultimate retribution. Essentially, this phrase represents the idea of a fair and appropriate punishment related to the severity of the crime that was committed. Just deserts if often times referred to as the 'retribution' type of sentencing and promotes the idea that one should be punished simply because one committed a crime. Also, it is a model that asserts that punishments should be commensurate with the moral gravity of offenses. The legal dictionary website defines this term as "a retributive theory of criminal punishment that proposed reduced judicial discretion in sentencing and specific sentences for criminal acts without regard to the individual defendant" (thefreedictionary.com). An example of just deserts would be any other type of retributive model which emphasizes in taking revenge on a criminal perpetrator or group of