Criminal justice, issues for judges and sentencing

Issues for Judges and Sentencing affiliation Issues for Judges and Sentencing In all judicial proceedings, it is theJudge’s sole responsibility to ensure that all parties receive hearing that if fair in a dignified forum. Although during the proceedings, certain aspects of the judge’s role may change depending on the case being heard. The subjects of legal ethics are the lawyers who prosecute or represent the defendants in a court of law. The rules that are in the court do vary depending on the jurisdiction, but they possess several features that are common (Johnson, 2006).
Ethical codes are used in most of the states and are based on professional conduct rules that help in judging and sentencing. In addition to these ethical rules, the prosecutors are also bound by other rules in the constitution that govern the conduct of professionalism. The judge in black robes is the only person in the court who is as a symbol of justice. Judges are expected to be neutral, and their decisions should be impartial, knowledgeable and authoritative. The judges guide the relevant people involved in the court and help in maintaining the courts proceedings (de Castro-Rodrigues & Sacau Fontenla, 2013).
There are a number of issues considered problematic in the perceived objectivities of the judge during sentencing. These include disparities during sentencing and extra-legal sentencing disparity shown in unequal punishment of legally similar offenders. It is during the sentencing the judge should be guided by the canons of the judge’s conduct. He or she should uphold and promote independence, minimize any risk of conflict and not engaging himself or herself in any political or activities of the campaign.
Response
From the discussion post, we can conclude that during the sentencing time, the judge is expected to be guided by the criminal history and the current offense level of seriousness in issuing out the appropriate sentencing. This is so to avoid unequal punishment basing on factors that do not relate to law issues (Wooldredge, 2010). Despite this freedom of issuing sentences, some federal guidelines require judges involved in some cases to impose sentences that are specific unless circumstances established are extenuating.
References
De Castro-Rodrigues, A., & Sacau Fontenla, A. (2013). Sentence pronouncements: What judges say when sentencing. European Journal of Criminology, 1477370813500887–. doi: 10. 1177/1477370813500887
Johnson, B. D. (2006). The multilevel context of criminal sentencing: Integrating judge- and county-level influences. Criminology. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1745-9125. 2006. 00049. x
Wooldredge, J. (2010). Judges’ unequal contributions to extralegal disparities in imprisonment. Criminology, 48, 539–567. doi: 10. 1111/j. 1745-9125. 2010. 00195. x