An offender's criminal record is a powerful determinant of sentence severity in almost all criminal justice systems. State and federal sentencing guidelines accord a central role to criminal record, which is the second most important factor after crime seriousness. As well, most states have recidivist statutes such as “three strikes and you're out,” which prescribe swinging penalties for recidivist offenders. Although a great deal of research has examined public perceptions of sentencing and crime seriousness, little work has addressed the question of public support for criminal record as an aggravating factor in the sentencing process. This article reviews the limited research on this question. It would appear that the public supports a limited use of criminal history information, although there is little public enthusiasm for statutes or guidelines that impose sentences the severity of which clearly violates principles of desert.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ashworth, A. (1992). Sentencing and criminal justice. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
2.
Bottomley, K. , & Pease, K. (1986). Crime and punishment: Interpreting the data. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
3.
Burbidge, S. (1982). Public attitudes concerning pardons. Ottawa: Ministry of the Solicitor General Canada.
4.
Davis, M. (1985). Just deserts for recidivists. Criminal Justice Ethics, 4, 29-50.
5.
Doble, J. , & Klein, J. (1989). Punishing criminals. The public's view. An Alabama survey. New York: Edna McConnell Clark Foundation.
6.
Doob, A. N. , & Roberts, J. V. (1982). Crime and the official response to crime: The view of the Canadian public. Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada.
7.
Doob, A. N. , & Roberts, J. V. (1983). Sentencing. An analysis of the public's view. Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada.
8.
Durham, A. (1987). Justice in sentencing: the role of prior record of criminal involvement. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 78, 614-643.
9.
English, K. , Crouch, J., & Pullen, S. (1989). Attitudes towards crime: A survey of Colorado citizens and criminal justice officials. Boulder: Colorado Department of Public Safety.
10.
Fichter, M. , & Veneziano, C. (1988). Criminal justice attitudes. Jefferson City: Missouri Department of Corrections.
11.
Finkel, N. J. , Maloney, S. T., Valbuena, M. Z., & Groscup, J. (1996). Recidivism, proportionalism and individualized punishment. American Behavioral Scientist, 39(4), 476-489.
12.
Fletcher, G. (1982). The recidivist premium. Criminal Justice Ethics, 1, 54-59.
13.
Higginbottom, S. F. , & Zamble, E. (1988). Categorizations of homicide cases: Agreement, accuracy and confidence of public assignments. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 30, 351-366.
14.
Hilton, N. Z. (1993) Police intervention and public opinion. In N. Z. Hilton (Ed.), Legal responses to wife assault (pp. 37-61). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15.
Jamieson, K. , & Flanagan, T. J. (Eds.). (1987). Sourcebook of criminal justice statistics—1986. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
16.
Klein, R. J. , Newman, I., Weis, D. M., & Bobner, R. F. (1983). The continuum of criminal offenses instrument: Further development and modification of Sellin and Wolfgang's Original Criminal Index. Journal of Offender Counseling, Services and Rehabilitation, 7, 33-53.
17.
Lacayo, R. (1994). Time, pp. 51-53.
18.
Mande, M. J. , & English, K. (1989). The effect of public opinion on correctional policy: A comparison of opinions and practice. Boulder: Colorado Department of Public Safety.
19.
McFatter, R. (1982). Purposes of punishment. Effects of utilities of criminal sanctions on perceived appropriateness. Journal of Applied Psychology, 67, 255-267.
20.
Monahan, J. , & Ruggiero, M. (1980). Psychological and psychiatric aspects of determinate sentencing. International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 3, 105-116.
21.
Moore, K. (1989). Pardons. Justice, mercy and the public interest. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
22.
O'Connor, M. E. (1978). A community's opinion on crime: Some preliminary findings. Australia and New Zealand Journal of Sociology, 14, 61-64.
23.
Oregon Criminal Justice Council . (1993). Oregon sentencing guidelines implementation manual. Portland, OR: Portland State University, School of Urban and Public Affairs.
24.
Pasewark, R. , Seidenzahl, D., & Pantle, M. (1981). Opinions concerning criminality among mental patients. Journal of Community Psychology, 9, 367-370.
25.
Reed, J. , & Nance, D. (1972). Society perpetuates the stigma of a conviction. Federal Probation, 2, 27-31.
26.
Roberts, J. V. (1988). Public opinion and sentencing: Surveys of the Canadian Sentencing Commission. Ottawa: Department of Justice Canada.
27.
Roberts, J. V. (1992). Public opinion, crime and criminal justice. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice. A review of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
Roberts, J. V. (1994). The role of criminal record in the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. Criminal Justice Ethics, 13, 21-30.
29.
Roberts, J. V. (in press). The role of criminal record in the sentencing process. In M. Tonry (Ed.), Crime and justice. A review of research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
30.
Roberts, J. V. , & Doob, A. N. (1990). News media influences on public views of sentencing. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 451-468.
31.
Roberts, J. V. , & White, N. R. (1986). Public estimates of recidivism rates: Consequences of a criminal stereotype. Canadian Journal of Criminology, 28, 229-241.
32.
Rossi, P. H. , & Anderson, A. B. (1982). The factorial survey approach: An introduction. In P. Rossi & J. P. Henry (Eds.), Measuring social judgments: The factorial survey approach. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
33.
Rossi, P. H., Berk, R. A., & Campbell, A. (1995). Popular views on sentencing federal criminals. Unpublished manuscript, Evaluation Design and Analysis, Amherst, MA.
34.
Stalans, L. (1993). Citizens' crime stereotypes, biased recall, and lay punishment preferences in abstract cases: The educative role of interpersonal sources. Law and Human Behavior, 17, 451-470.
35.
Stalans, L. , & Diamond, S. (1990). Formation and change in lay evaluations of criminal sentencing: Misperception and discontent. Law and Human Behavior, 14, 199-214.
36.
State of Washington Sentencing Guidelines Commission . (1992). Implementation manual. Olympia: Author.
37.
Wasik, M., & von Hirsch, A. (1994, June). Section 29 revised: Previous convictions in sentencing. Criminal Law Review, 409-418.
38.
Wilkins, L. (1984). Consumerist criminology. London: Heinemann.
39.
Zimmerman, S. , Van Alstyne, D., & Dunn, C. (1988). The national punishment survey and public consequences. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 25, 120-149.
