scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Journal Article•DOI•

Suspended sentences in Spain: Decarceration and recidivism

Josep Cid1•
Autonomous University of Barcelona1
01 Jun 2005-Probation Journal (SAGE Publications)-Vol. 52, Iss: 2, pp 169-179
TL;DR: In this article, the authors present data and empirical research about the effectiveness of the suspended sentence with respect to its two main goals: reducing the use of prison and preventing offenders from re-offending.
Abstract: The suspended sentence, along with the fine, is the most commonly used alternative to prison in Spain. This sentence is generally regarded as a good sanction because it avoids the personal and financial costs of prison for occasional offenders which are not in need of rehabilitation. The main aim of this article is to present data and empirical research about the effectiveness of the suspended sentence with respect to its two main goals: reducing the use of prison and preventing offenders from re-offending. The data appear to suggest that this is an effective sentence in these terms, but the article also raises questions about the need to replace suspended sentences with more rehabilitative orders in some special cases.

Summary (3 min read)

Jump to: [Introduction] – [Is the suspended sentence a justifiable punishment?] – [ALL ELIGIBLE OFFENDERS 84.2% 15.8%] – [Suspended sentence and decarceration] – [YEARS N. CONVICTIONS FOR] – [Suspended sentence and recidivism] – [OLD OFFENCES OR] – [LAWYER PAID] and [Conclusions]

Introduction

  • The suspended sentence – a prison sentence that is not implemented as long as the offender refrains from committing another offence - seems to have played a very important role in the limitation of the use of prison in many jurisdictionsi.
  • In the punitive mood apparent in some western countries – Spain among them - the suspended sentence could be submitted to criticism for being a ‘soft’ sanction.
  • It seems important to explore whether, in the light of the available evidence, this non-custodial sanction should be supported or replaced by other alternatives more matched to the seriousness of the offence and/or more aimed at the rehabilitation of the offender.
  • The paper begins with a brief discussion about the possible justifications of the suspended sentence in the desert and utilitarian theories of punishment.
  • The data appear to be supportive of this sentence but nevertheless some further debate may be required about the need to replace it by other sentences in some particular cases.

Is the suspended sentence a justifiable punishment?

  • In a system of alternatives to prison based on the principles of desert (Wassik-Von Hirsch 1988:570) it seems that there is no room for the suspended sentence.
  • On the other hand, if the suspended sentenced is to be applied to non-serious offences, then there might be more appropriate non-custodial sentences - like the discharge or the fine - able to express the more limited censure deserved by the crime and furthermore the use of imprisonment in case of default could be inappropriate (Wassik-Von Hirsch 1988:570)ii. .
  • This hypothesis is, of course, one that is amenable to research enquiry.
  • It is possible to explore the level of recidivism of people who have received suspended sentences.
  • Minor offences are usually punished with a fine or, in some cases, judges have the discretion to impose a fine or arrest.

ALL ELIGIBLE OFFENDERS 84.2% 15.8%

  • The research is a representative sample of the convictions imposed in 1998 by the judges of Barcelona, which deal with offences punishable with a maximum of three years’ imprisonment.
  • When the offender has an old criminal record or, after the date of the actual offence but prior to disposal, has committed other offences, then a suspended sentence is roughly granted in half of the cases.
  • Other variables that in the study of Cid-Larrauri and colleagues (2002:66-70) reached statistical significance in the decision of judges were: public prosecutor agreement with the suspended sentence, compensation to the victim, not being in prison in the moment of the decision and not being drug-addicted.
  • It is relevant to point out that judges tend to decide about suspended sentences without the help of a pre-sentence report that might give relevant information about the prediction of recidivism.
  • In practice, according to the research of Cid-Larrauri and colleagues (2002:67) judges disregard almost absolutely the possibility of combining the suspended sentence with probationv.

Suspended sentence and decarceration

  • The penal code of 1995 made some important reforms in the system of alternatives to prison.
  • One way of verifying if the new system has been effective in reducing the use of prison sentences consists of comparing the evolution of the number of convictions with the evolution of prison admissions.
  • If no other reasons are operating, the system would be effective if, in relation to convictions, admissions into prison tend to decrease.
  • Table 2 shows the absolute number of convictions and admissions to prison in the recent years and (taking 1996 as a basis) the relationship between these two variables.

YEARS N. CONVICTIONS FOR

  • Source: INE (Spanish National Institute of Statistic, http://www.ine.es) for convictions.
  • Data on prisons admissions are not published.
  • The information has been provided to the author by the Spanish Home Office (Ministerio del Interior) and the Catalan Ministry of Justice (Conselleria de Justicia).
  • Once the authors know that there is a very significant reduction in the number of admissions to prison in relation to convictions they should explore which is the most relevant factor in operation.

Suspended sentence and recidivism

  • Given that the authors have indicated that the suspended sentence, in conjunction with other reforms, has had a relevant effect in the reduction of prison admissions, the next question is to consider the costs of this penal sanction, measured on the basis of the recidivism of the people who have benefited from it.
  • The research conducted in this regard in which the authors have just analysed the level of recidivism of a sample of people who in 1998-1999 were granted a suspended sentence by the judges of Barcelona.
  • The research consists of a follow-up of offenders that in a previous study (Cid- Larrauri and colleagues 2002) were granted a suspended sentence.
  • These 119 offenders received suspended sentences between April 1998 and December 1999.
  • At least in Spain this is the easier data to obtain.

OLD OFFENCES OR

  • Incarcerated and those not incarcerated with respect to the following variables: a) age when committing the current offence; b) sex; c) kind of current offence; d) nationality; e) criminal record; e) financial means of the offenderx.
  • The results are shown in the following table:.

LAWYER PAID

  • Conviction in their criminal record, the recidivism rate – measured by incarceration - is very low (10.6%).
  • When the suspended sentence is granted to offenders that – although not having recent convictions - have either old convictions or convictions for offences committed after the current offence, then the recidivism rate increases significantly up to 38.1%.
  • The only variable statistically correlated with recidivism is the criminal record of the offender.
  • (iv) Although, in common with other research (Petersilia 1997, May 1999), the authors found that offenders with some characteristics (for example, being less than 25 when committing the current offence, being male, having been assisted by a state lawyer) show a higher rate of recidivism, none of these differences reached statistical significance.
  • Possibly with a larger sample some of this factors could become significant.

Conclusions

  • The penal code of 1995 raised the limit of consideration of suspended sentences from one to two years’ imprisonment.
  • Given that in a five-year follow-up, only 17.6% of the offenders of the sample that were granted suspended sentence were incarcerated, it seems that the suspended sentence is an inexpensive means of dealing with offenders.
  • The authors do not know to what extent this positive outcome comes from the kind of sentence per se, as opposed to other factors.
  • From this point of view it may be problematic that Spanish judges decide about the suspended sentence without the help of a pre-sentence report.
  • I am also grateful to Eulalia Luque, who did the statistical task, to Beatriz Tébar and Daniel Varona, who helped me in planning the research, and to Fergus McNeill and to Elena Larrauri who made a revision of the draft paper.

Did you find this useful? Give us your feedback

Figures (5)

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

1
Suspended Sentence in Spain:
Decarceration and Recidivism
José Cid
Criminologia Aplicada a la Penologia
Department of Political Science and Public Law
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona
e-mail: Josep.Cid@uab.es
The final, definitive version of this paper has been published in Probation Journal, 52 (2):
169-179, 2005, by SAGE Publications Ltd.
Available at http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0264550505052686
2
Abstract
The suspended sentence – along with the fine- is the most commonly used alternative to
prison in Spain. This sentence is generally regarded as a good sanction because it avoids the
personal and financial costs of prison for occasional offenders that are not in need of
rehabilitation. The main aim of this paper is to present data and empirical research about
the effectiveness of the suspended sentence with respect its two main goals: reducing the
use of prison and preventing offenders from re-offending. The data appear to suggest that
this is an effective sentence in these terms, but the paper also raises questions about the
need to replace suspended sentences with more rehabilitative orders in some special cases.
Keywords
Suspended sentence, decarceration, recidivism, Spain.
3
Introduction
The suspended sentence – a prison sentence that is not implemented as long as the
offender refrains from committing another offence - seems to have played a very important
role in the limitation of the use of prison in many jurisdictions
i
. However, in the punitive
mood apparent in some western countries – Spain among them - the suspended sentence
could be submitted to criticism for being a ‘soft’ sanction. In this context, it seems
important to explore whether, in the light of the available evidence, this non-custodial
sanction should be supported or replaced by other alternatives more matched to the
seriousness of the offence and/or more aimed at the rehabilitation of the offender.
The paper begins with a brief discussion about the possible justifications of the
suspended sentence in the desert and utilitarian theories of punishment. It seems that the
latter theory could support suspended sentence so long as it is true that no other
intervention is needed for the rehabilitation of the offender. After presenting the legal
framework of the suspended sentence and showing that, in common with other countries, in
Spain this sentence has produced a decarceration effect in reducing the use of prison, the
paper explores the evidence about the level of recidivism of people granted suspended
sentences. The data appear to be supportive of this sentence but nevertheless some further
debate may be required about the need to replace it by other sentences in some particular
cases.
Is the suspended sentence a justifiable punishment?
In a system of alternatives to prison based on the principles of desert (Wassik-Von
Hirsch 1988:570) it seems that there is no room for the suspended sentence. If the
suspended sentence is to be applied in cases of serious offences then the suspension of the
prison sentence – with no other requirement for the offender than not committing another
offence - would not express the censure that the crime would be seen to deserve. On the
other hand, if the suspended sentenced is to be applied to non-serious offences, then there
might be more appropriate non-custodial sentences - like the discharge or the fine - able to
4
express the more limited censure deserved by the crime and furthermore the use of
imprisonment in case of default could be inappropriate (Wassik-Von Hirsch 1988:570)
ii
.
. For these reasons, drawing on desert theory, the English Criminal Justice Act of
1991 made the suspended sentence applicable only in exceptional cases, leading to a
practical abolition of this sentence in the years that followed (Ashworth 2001:68).
From a utilitarian approach however, the suspended sentence might attract more
approval. Almost a century ago the German scholar Von Liszt, and other participants in the
“International Union of Criminal Law” recommended the introduction of the suspended
sentence, linking this to the “occasional criminal theory”. According to this theory, those
offenders whose offending were occasional would refrain from re-offending merely
through the threat of the prison. However, for such offenders, not in need of rehabilitation,
the prison experience itself could be counterproductive, partly because of the possibility of
coming under the negative influence of other more experienced inmates (Von Liszt 1882:
89-90).
An analysis of the suspended sentence from a ‘cost-benefits’ point of view, shows
that the possible benefits of the suspended sentence – avoidance of prison experience and
saving state resources - should be compared with its costs. These supposed costs might
include, firstly, a weakened deterrence or moral education effect in comparison to more
serious punishments and, secondly, the possibility that the level of recidivism of offenders
might be higher than with other kinds of punishments more focused on incapacitation or on
rehabilitation. In the discussion below these two ‘costs’ of the suspended sentence are
considered.
The advocates of the suspended sentenced have usually watered down the first
objection or ‘cost’ – its possibly weaker capacity for deterrence/moral education - arguing
that it should only be applicable for non-serious offences in respect of which the need for
deterrence or moral education is, in any case, more limited. More generally, it seems that
research in the area of deterrence does not confirm a strong correlation between rising
severities of punishments and subsequent levels of criminality (Von Hirsch-Bottoms-
Burney-Wikström 1999:48).
The second objection to or ‘cost’ of the suspended sentence – the possibly lesser
capacity to reduce the level of recidivism of offenders compared to other sanctions -
5
becomes the heart of a utilitarian discussion about the effectiveness of this sentence. As
stated before, there are at least theoretical grounds for suggesting that the suspended
sentence might be effective in preventing recidivism so long as it effectively targeted
occasional offenders that might refrain from committing new offences only due to the
conviction and the threat of prison in case of a new offence.
This hypothesis is, of course, one that is amenable to research enquiry. It is possible
to explore the level of recidivism of people who have received suspended sentences. If the
level is very low, then it seems that the “occasional criminal theory” might be confirmed.
But, once we know the level of recidivism of the people granted the suspended sentence we
should make appropriate comparisons with other non-custodial sanctions
iii
. Only then will
we be able to answer the question about the justification of the suspended sentence from a
utilitarian point of view.
Legal framework and use of the suspended sentence in Spain
The research about recidivism of offenders presented below has been done with
people who were granted suspended sentences in Spain. Given that each legal system can
use suspended sentences in a different ways, it is worth introducing the main legal features
of the suspended sentence in Spain.
The Spanish penal code distinguishes between: minor offences (“faltas”) and
offences (“delitos”). Minor offences are usually punished with a fine or, in some cases,
judges have the discretion to impose a fine or arrest. In practice, the usual sanction for a
minor offence is a fine. In the case of offences, the most common punishment is prison and
only for some offences does the judge have discretion to impose a fine.
When the mandatory legal punishment for the offence is prison (for example, with
offences like theft of more than 400€, burglary, drug trafficking and robbery) the law
establishes a minimum and maximum sentence length (for example, the legal punishment
for a theft is between 6 and 18 months of prison). In such cases, the judge has to impose the
prison sentence and then s/he has to decide whether or not the suspended sentence might be
granted.
For a suspended sentence to be granted
iv
, the offender has to meet the following
criteria:
Citations
More filters
Journal Article•DOI•
The evolution of sentencing policy and practice in England and Wales, 2003–2015

[...]

Julian V. Roberts, Andrew Ashworth
20 Jun 2016-Crime and Justice
TL;DR: Sentencing in England and Wales has evolved in a direction apart from other common law countries as discussed by the authors, with a steep increase in indeterminate sentence offenders, now accounting for some 19 percent of the prison population, and a striking rise in the volume of suspended sentences that has reduced the use of community sentences rather than terms of imprisonment.
Abstract: Sentencing in England and Wales has evolved in a direction apart from other common law countries. Although sentencing problems found in many Western nations are present, legislative and judicial responses have been very different. The use of custody rose steeply in the 1990s and has remained stable around that level in recent years. Crimes of violence and sexual aggression have, however, attracted increasingly longer sentences. The other principal changes are a steep increase in indeterminate sentence offenders, now accounting for some 19 percent of the prison population, and a striking rise in the volume of suspended sentences that has reduced the use of community sentences rather than terms of imprisonment. Net widening has therefore occurred. The principal distinction between England and most other jurisdictions is that statutorily binding guidelines now exist for both magistrates’ and higher courts. Unlike most US guidelines that assign offenses to levels of seriousness within a single sentenc...

28 citations

Cites background from "Suspended sentences in Spain: Decar..."

  • ...18 For example, Lappi-Seppälä (2001) for Finland, Cid (2005) for Spain, and Roberts (2004) for Canada....

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
The recidivism of offenders given suspended sentences in New South Wales, Australia

[...]

Don Weatherburn1, Lorana Bartels2•
University of New South Wales1, University of Tasmania2
01 Sep 2008-British Journal of Criminology
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors used propensity matching to compare the effect of suspended sentences on recidivism to that of supervised bonds and found no difference in rates of reconviction following the imposition of these sanctions.
Abstract: The suspended sentence has been described as the 'Sword of Damocles' and praised as a means of exploiting the deterrent effects of prison while avoiding some of its human and financial costs. The deterrent value of suspended sentences is said to derive from the fact that the consequences of reoffending during the period of a suspended sentence are 'known and certain', whereas those attending a breach of probation are not. Past research, however, has shown that suspended sentences do little to reduce the use of imprisonment and, in some cases, actually increase it. Studies purporting to show the deterrent effectiveness of suspended sentences, on the other hand, have been few in number and methodologically weak. In this article, we use propensity matching to compare the effect of suspended sentences on recidivism to that of supervised bonds. We find no difference in rates of reconviction following the imposition of these sanctions. The implications of this finding for the UK system of suspended sentences are discussed.

22 citations

Journal Article•DOI•
The Weight of the Sword of Damocles: A Reconviction Analysis of Suspended Sentences in Tasmania

[...]

Lorana Bartels1•
Australian Institute of Criminology1
01 Apr 2009-Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology
TL;DR: The authors examined the reconviction rates for all sentences imposed over a 2-year period in the Tasmanian Supreme Court, as well as examining different outcomes on the basis of key sentencing variables, including offence type and prior record.
Abstract: Suspended sentences are a widely used but controversial sentencing disposition. This article presents reconviction rates for all sentences imposed over a 2-year period in the Tasmanian Supreme Court, as well as examining different outcomes on the basis of key sentencing variables, including offence type and prior record. The results demonstrate that suspended sentences have comparatively low reconviction rates. The study examines the relative frequency and seriousness of offending, thereby overcoming a common criticism of reconviction studies that they are an 'all-or-nothing' measure, which does not take into account changes in offending patterns. The study also avoids the common error of misattributing reconviction rates to incidences of offending that occurred prior to the imposition of the relevant sentence by excluding pseudoreconvictions, and the findings indicate the extent to which pseudoreconvictions can skew reconviction results. In addition, the use of suspended sentences in combination with other orders, and the reconviction outcomes of such sentences, is analysed. The article concludes with a discussion of the implications of my findings for the further use of suspended sentences, and for future research.

18 citations

Additional excerpts

  • ...Studies based on New Zealand (Searle, Paulin, & Waldegrave, 1998) and Spanish (Cid, 2005) data also present reconviction rates following suspended sentences in the absence of information on other sentencing dispositions and are therefore of limited application as it is impossible to ascertain what the reconviction rate would have been for offenders who had received some other penalty....

    [...]

  • ...Studies based on New Zealand (Searle, Paulin, & Waldegrave, 1998) and Spanish (Cid, 2005) data also present reconviction rates following suspended sentences in the absence of information on other sentencing dispositions and are therefore of limited application as it is impossible to ascertain what…...

    [...]

Develpment of crime, social change, mass media, crime policy, sanctioning practice and thier impact on prison population rates

[...]

Josep Cid Moliné1, Elena Larrauri•
Autonomous University of Barcelona1
01 Jan 2009
TL;DR: In this article, the authors propose that the two trends that contribute to the enlargement of the prison incarceration rates, the larger time served by prisoners and the criminalization of new phenomena, will continue in the future.
Abstract: Spain has suffered a big increase of imprisonment between 1980 and 2006, passing from an average prison population of 17,000 prisoners in 1980 to 63,000 in 2006, meaning a growth of 266% in average prison population in 26 years. In order to explore the reasons for this increase in prison population, this paper proposes that is useful to distinguish two main periods: a) 1980-1994 (increase in prison population, followed by stability between 1995 and 2000, and b) 2001-2006 (a second increase in prison population). During these two periods, the growth of incarceration rates is higher in the first period (12% average increase per year) than in the second (6% average increase per year). More recent trends seem to announce an even more pronounced escalation of imprisonment in the foreseeable future. Authors proposes that the two trends that in Spain contribute to the enlargement of the prison incarceration rates, the larger time served by prisoners and the criminalization of new phenomena, will continue in the future.

9 citations

Book Chapter•DOI•
European Prison Policy and Spanish Prison Practices: Understanding Confluences and Gaps

[...]

José Cid1, Ariadna Andreu1•
University of Barcelona1
01 Jan 2017
TL;DR: In this article, the authors studied the adaptation of Spanish legislation and penal practices to European prison policies and explored to what extent these changes can be related to the reports of the Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) and the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).
Abstract: Democratic Spain can be studied as an example of adaptation of its legislation and penal practices to European prison policies. Since the Spanish transition to democracy started after the death of Franco (1975), Spain has transformed radically its legislation and practices related to imprisonment. Among the main aspects of this transformation are the introduction of a system of alternatives to imprisonment (which has significantly reduced the number of admissions to prison), the high standard of prisoners’ rights and quality of life in Spanish institutions and the opportunities given to prisoners for rehabilitation and resettlement. This chapter explores to what extent these changes can be related to the reports of the Committee for the Prevention of Torture (CPT) and the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). However, in some other aspects Spanish penal practices are less adapted to European policies: the increase in the length of imprisonment and the lack of a universal system of early release are features that seem in contradiction with the recommendations of the Council of Europe. Explanations for these gaps are explored.

5 citations

References
More filters
Book•
Rethinking What Works with Offenders: Probation, Social Context and Desistance from Crime

[...]

Stephen Farrall
03 Sep 2002
TL;DR: Christine Knott (Chief Officer, Greater Manchester Probation Area) as mentioned in this paper introduced the agenda of desistance from crime in the context of social context, motivation, change and probation supervision.
Abstract: Contents Foreword by Christine Knott (Chief Officer, Greater Manchester Probation Area) Introduction. Part 1 Introduction 1 Probation, social context and desistance from crime: introducing the agenda 2 Realism, criminal careers and complexity 3 The Study Part 2 Probation, motivation and social contexts 4 Defining 'success' 5 The focus of probation 6 Resolving obstacles: the role of probation supervision 7 Motivation and probation 8 Probation work: content and context 9 Motivation, changing contexts and probation supervision Part 3 Persistance and desistance 10 Desistance, change and probation supervision 11 The factors associated with offending Part 4 Conclusions 12 Probation, social context and desistance from crime: developing the agenda Index

368 citations

"Suspended sentences in Spain: Decar..." refers background in this paper

  • ...It seems that for these offenders it might have been more useful if a non-custodial sanction had been used, like probation or treatment added to the suspended sentence, aimed at confronting their criminogenic needs or the obstacles to desistance (Farrall, 2002: 220)....

    [...]

Book•
Criminal deterrence and sentence severity : an analysis of recent research

[...]

Andrew Von Hirsch, Anthony Bottoms, Elizabeth Burney, Per-Olof H. Wikström
01 Jan 1999
TL;DR: In this article, the authors examined the marginal deterrent effects of changing the certainty of punishment, that is, of altering the likelihood of an offender's being apprehended and convicted for a crime.
Abstract: The Insitute of Criminology at the University of Cambridge recently undertook,at the behest of the Home Office, a comprehensive study of the literature on criminal deterrence, concentrating on recent research. The result, published in this book, examines the popular claim that 'deterrence works'. That it works in general terms is beyond dispute, but the claim most favoured by law-makers is narrower: that tougher sentences have a direct impact on criminal behaviour, limiting the number and severity of offences committed. This study seeks to discover the truth of that claim. Deterrence as a penal aim, is a broad subject, hence the authors of this work decided to look at two elements of recent research. First they looked at studies which examine the marginal deterrent effects of changing the certainty of punishment, that is, of altering the likelihood of an offender's being apprehended and convicted for a crime. Secondly they looked at studies of the marginal deterrent effects of altering the severity of punishment through changes in sentencing policy. It is their evaluation and analysis of the latter which is the principal focus of the work, and which will make the book essential reading for all those interested in sentencing and penal policy.

266 citations

"Suspended sentences in Spain: Decar..." refers background in this paper

  • ...More generally, it seems that research in the area of deterrence does not confirm a strong correlation between rising severities of punishments and subsequent levels of criminality (Von Hirsch et al., 1999: 48)....

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
Probation in the United States

[...]

Joan Petersilia
01 Jan 1997-Crime and Justice
TL;DR: Probation officers supervise two-thirds of all correctional clientele in the United States, and despite the unprecedented growth in probation populations over the past decade, probation budgets have not grown. as discussed by the authors found that U.S. probation services are underfunded relative to prisons and serious felons often go unsupervised, encouraging offender recidivism and reinforcing the public's view that probation is too lenient and lacking in credibility.
Abstract: Probation officers supervise two-thirds of all correctional clientele in the United States. But despite the unprecedented growth in probation populations over the past decade, probation budgets have not grown. The result is that U. S. probation services are underfunded relative to prisons and serious felons often go unsupervised, encouraging offender recidivism and reinforcing the public's view that probation is too lenient and lacking in credibility. Yet, there is much unrealized potential in probation. Recent research shows that probation programs, if properly designed and implemented, can reduce recidivism and drug use. Moreover, certain probation programs are judged by offenders to be more punitive than short prison terms, and the public seems increasingly willing to support intermediate sanctions for nonviolent offenders. Experimentation and evaluation are needed to determine whether adequately funded probation systems can protect society and rehabilitate offenders.

123 citations

"Suspended sentences in Spain: Decar..." refers result in this paper

  • ...Although, in common with other research (Petersilia, 1997; May, 1999), we found that offenders with some characteristics (for example, being younger than 25 years old when committing the current offence, being male and having been assisted by a state lawyer) show a higher rate of recidivism, none…...

    [...]

Journal Article•DOI•
The suspended sentence in england, 1967–1978

[...]

Anthony Bottoms1•
University of Sheffield1
01 Jan 1981-British Journal of Criminology

59 citations

"Suspended sentences in Spain: Decar..." refers background in this paper

  • ...Although in England the suspended sentence did not achieve the original aim of replacing the use of prison (Bottoms, 1981: 26), recently the reduction of its use due to the Criminal Justice Act of 1991 has produced an increase in the use of prison (Ashworth, 2001: 71)....

    [...]

Sentencing and punishment in Finland: the decline of the repressive ideal

[...]

Tapio Lappi-Seppälä
01 Jan 2001

55 citations

Related Papers (5)
The Effect of Prison Sentence Length on Recidivism: Evidence from Random Judicial Assignment

[...]

09 Dec 2015-Social Science Research Network
Michael A. Roach, Max M. Schanzenbach
The recidivism of offenders given suspended sentences in New South Wales, Australia

[...]

01 Sep 2008-British Journal of Criminology
Don Weatherburn, Lorana Bartels
The Invisible Sanction: Suspended Sentences in Victoria 1985–1991

[...]

01 Jun 1995-Australian and New Zealand Journal of Criminology
David Tait
Sentencing Thresholds in German Criminal Law and Practice: Legal and Empirical Aspects

[...]

30 Aug 2017-Criminal Law Forum
Stefan Harrendorf
Crime Reduction and the Length of Prison Sentences

[...]

01 Jan 2002-Law & Policy
Richard L. Lippke
Frequently Asked Questions (9)
Q1. What are the contributions mentioned in the paper "Suspended sentence in spain: decarceration and recidivism" ?

In this paper, the authors explored the evidence about the level of recidivism of people granted suspended sentences and showed that in Spain, only 17.6 % of the offenders of the sample that were granted suspended sentence were incarcerated. 

In the case of offences, the most common punishment is prison and only for some offences does the judge have discretion to impose a fine. 

The most relevant variable in the decision of judges is the criminal record of theoffender –having a clean record is a guarantee of getting a suspended sentence-. 

The second objection to or ‘cost’ of the suspended sentence – the possibly lessercapacity to reduce the level of recidivism of offenders compared to other sanctions -becomes the heart of a utilitarian discussion about the effectiveness of this sentence. 

The confirmation that, as it has happened in other countries, the increase in the useof the suspended sentence –due to the rise of the upper limit form one to two years imprisonment- is the main responsible for the reduction in the prison admissions comes from table 3, which shows the proportion of prison sentences which are suspended, between 1996 and 2003. 

An analysis of the suspended sentence from a ‘cost-benefits’ point of view, showsthat the possible benefits of the suspended sentence – avoidance of prison experience and saving state resources - should be compared with its costs. 

For a suspended sentence to be grantediv, the offender has to meet the followingcriteria:(i) the prison sentence should not be more than two years; (ii) the offence should be the first offence of that person (or a relevant time haspassed between his or her latest conviction and the present offence). 

A suspended sentenced is possible even when the judge deals with a first offence but the offender has committed another offence subsequently (prior to the court hearing);(iii) the person has paid compensation to the victim (except when the person isunable to do so). 

Othervariables that in the study of Cid-Larrauri and colleagues (2002:66-70) reached statistical significance in the decision of judges were: public prosecutor agreement with the suspended sentence, compensation to the victim, not being in prison in the moment of the decision and not being drug-addicted.