In September 2007, the Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council released a report
(2007c) recommending the introduction of sentence indications for indictable
offences in Victoria's intermediate court. In response, on July 1, 2008, a
legislated sentence indication process was implemented into Victoria's
intermediate and Supreme Courts in s 23A of the Crimes (Criminal Trials) Act
1999 (Vic). This process is now governed by s 208-s 209 of the Criminal
Procedure Act 2009 (Vic). Drawing upon national and international commentary and
experiences with sentence indications, this article examines the potential
benefits and disadvantages of the Victorian legislation, including its limited
capacity to attract early guilty pleas and its potentially negative impact on
victims and defendants. This article contends that the desire for court
efficiency has led to the implementation of reforms across criminal justice
systems that, while seeking to apply the benefits of reduced delays and early
guilty pleas, ultimately prioritise efficiency gains above the interests of the
public, victims and defendants. The Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council's
proposal (2007c) and the subsequent provisions introducing an indictable
indication scheme in s 208-s 209 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 (Vic), are
used to inform this argument.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AshworthA. (1994). The criminal process: An evaluative
study. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
2.
Australian Law Reform Commission. (2006). Same crime, same time: Sentencing
of federal offenders (ALRC Report 103).
Canberra: Australian Law
Reform Commission.
3.
BuckleS.BuckleL. (1977). Bargaining for justice: Case
disposition and reform in the criminal courts. New
York: Praeger
Publishers.
4.
BurumaY. (2004). Doubts on the upsurge of the
victim's role in criminal law. In KapteinH.MalschM. (Eds.), Crime, victims and justice: Essays on principles
and practice (pp. 1–16). Aldershot,
England:
Ashgate.
5.
ByrneP. (1995). Sentence indication hearings
in New South Wales. Criminal Law Journal,
19,
209–221.
6.
CookB.DavidF.GrantA. (1999). Victims' needs, victims' rights:
Policies and programs for victims of crime in Australia
(Research and Public Policy Series No. 19).
Canberra, Australia:
Australian Institute of
Criminology.
7.
CotterrellR. (2004). Law in social theory and
social theory in the study of law. In SaratA. (Ed.), The Blackwell Companion to law and society (pp.
13–30). Oxford:
Blackwell Publishing.
8.
CoughlanP. (2000, March).
Committal—post committal.
Criminal trial reform conference.
Melbourne: Australasian Institute
of Judicial Administration. Retrieved October 1,
2007, from http://www.aija.org.au/ctrpapers/COUGHLAN.htm.
9.
DawkinsK. (2001). Defence disclosure in
criminal cases. New Zealand Law Review,
1,
35–66.
10.
DouglassJ. (1988). Ethical issues in
prosecution. Houston, TX:
National College of DA, Houston University Law
Centre.
11.
ErezE. (2000). Integrating a victim
perspective in criminal justice through victim impact
statements. In CrawfordA.GoodeyJ. (Eds.), Integrating a victim perspective within criminal
justice (pp. 166–184). Aldershot,
England: Ashgate.
12.
FattahE. (1999). Victims' rights: Past,
present and future—a global view.
Victims' rights: Future directions conference.
Sydney, Australia: Sydney
City Mission Victims Support Service, Australian Institute of
Criminology. Retrieved March 1, 2007, from http://www.aic.gov.au/publications
13.
FitzgeraldO. (1990). The guilty plea and summary
justice. Toronto, Canada:
Carswell Publishing.
14.
FlatmanG.BagaricM. (2001). The victim and the
prosecutor. Deakin University Law Review,
6(1),
238–254.
15.
FlynnA. (2007). Carl Williams: Secret deals
and bargained Justice—the underworld of Victoria's plea
bargaining system. Current Issues in Criminal
Justice, 19(1),
120–126.
16.
FreibergA.SeifmanR. (2001). Plea bargaining in Victoria:
The role of counsel. Criminal Law Journal,
25(2),
64–74.
17.
FreibergA.WillisJ. (2003). Sentence
indication. Criminal Law Journal,
27,
246–259.
18.
GoodeyJ. (2005). Victims and victimology: Research,
policy and practice. Harlow,
England: Pearson
Longman.
19.
IndermaurD. (1990). Perceptions of crime seriousness
and sentencing: A comparison of court practice and the perceptions of a
sample of the public and judges. Canberra,
Australia: Criminology Research Council of
Australia.
20.
JacobsonJ.HoughM. (2007). Mitigation: The role of personal
factors in sentencing. London:
Prison Trust Reform.
21.
JenkinsS. (1994). Plea bargaining and its
consequences: A study in the criminalisation process.
Ann Arbo, MI: University
Microfilms International.
JohnsonR. (2008, February). A looking glass on
summary sentencing in New Zealand. Sentencing conference.
Canberra, Australia: National
Judicial College of Australia, Australian National University College of
Law.
24.
JUSTICE (1993). Negotiated justice: A closer look
at the implications of plea bargains.
London: JUSTICE
publications.
25.
KaganR.A. (2004). Regulators and regulatory
processes. In SaratA. (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to law and society (pp.
195–212). Oxford:
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
26.
KleinJ. (1976). Let's make a deal: Negotiated
justice. Lanham, MD:
Lexington Books.
27.
LubetS. (2006). The triage
dilemma. Hofstra Law Review,
34(3),
673–687.
28.
MackK.AnleuS. (1995). Pleading guilty: Issues and
practices. Victoria, Australia:
Australian Institute of Judicial Administration
Incorporated.
29.
Mainstreet Criminal Procedure Committee. (2005). Report on backlog in Vancouver
adult criminal court. Vancouver,
Canada: Provincial Court of British
Colombia.
30.
MatherL. (1979). Plea bargaining or trial: The
process of criminal case disposition. Toronto,
Canada: Lexington
Books.
31.
New Zealand Law Reform Commission. (2005). Criminal pre-trial processes:
justice through efficiency (Report 89, June
2005). Wellington, New Zealand:
New Zealand Law Reform
Commission.
PayneJ. (2007). Criminal trial delays in Australia:
Trial listing outcomes (Research and Public Policy Series
No. 74). Canberra, Australia:
Australian Institute of
Criminology.
SamuelE.ClarkI. (2003). A summary of responses to the
consultation on the 2002 review of the practices and procedures of the High
Court of Justiciary. Edinburgh,
Scotland: University of Edinburgh, Scottish
Executive Research Council.
38.
SebbaL. (1996). Third parties: Victims and the
criminal justice system. Columbus,
OH: Ohio State University
Press.
39.
ShaplandJ. (1981). Between conviction and sentence:
The process of mitigation. London:
Routledge.
40.
SpearsD.PolettiP.MacKinnellI. (1994). Sentencing indication hearing pilot
scheme. Sydney, Australia:
Judicial Commission of New South
Wales.
41.
Standing Committee of Attorneys-General. (2000). Deliberate forum on criminal trial
reform report. Canberra, Australia:
Commonwealth Department of
Attorney-General.
42.
StrangH. (2002). Repair or revenge: Victims and
restorative justice. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
43.
SulanJ.R. (2000, March). Defence co-operation
in the trial process. Criminal Trial Reform
Conference, Melbourne:
Australasian Institution of Judicial
Administration. Retrieved October 1, 2007, from
http://www.aija.org.au/ctr/SULAN.htm
44.
United Kingdom Home Office. (2002). Justice for all
(The White Paper Report, July 2002).
London: Home
Office.
45.
United Kingdom Office of the Attorney-General. (2007). Fraud review: Final
report. London: Office
of the Attorney-General Department.
46.
Victorian Attorney-General. (2005). Media release: Council to advise
on sentence indications and discounts (pp. 1–2).
Friday 16 September 2005. Retrieved August 12, 2006, from http://www.dpc.vic.gov.au/domino/Web_Notes/newmedia.nsf
47.
Victorian Community Council Against Violence. (1997). Community knowledge and
perceptions of sentencing in Victoria: A report on the findings of the
consultations. Melbourne, Australia:
Victorian Community Council Against
Violence.
48.
Victorian Law Reform Commission. (2004). Sexual offences final
report. Melbourne, Australia:
Victorian Law Reform Commission.
Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council. (2007c). Sentence indications and
specified sentence discounts final report.
Melbourne, Australia:
Sentencing Advisory Council.
54.
Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council. (2007d). Sentencing trends for murder in
Victoria. Melbourne, Australia:
Sentencing Advisory Council.
55.
Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council. (2007e). Sentencing trends for attempted
murder in the higher courts of Victoria. Melbourne,
Australia: Sentencing Advisory
Council.
56.
Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council. (2007f). Sentencing trends for rape in
Victoria. Melbourne, Australia:
Sentencing Advisory Council.
57.
Victorian Sentencing Advisory Council. (2008). Suspended sentences final report
part 2. Melbourne, Australia:
Sentencing Advisory Council
58.
VincentA.ZeleznikowJ. (2005). Towards a plea bargaining
decision support system for Legal Aid lawyers in Victorian lower
courts. In ZeleznikowJ.LodderA. (Eds.), Second International ODR Workshop (pp.
47–58). Nijmjegen,
Netherlands: Wolf Legal
Publishers.
59.
WalklateS. (1989). Victimology: The victim and the
criminal justice process. London:
Unwin Hyman.
WeatherburnD.BakerJ. (2000). Managing trial court delay: An
analysis of trial court processing in the NSW District criminal
court. Sydney, Australia:
New South Wales Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research,
Attorney-General Department.
62.
WeatherburnD.LindB. (1995). The impact of the New South
Wales sentence indication scheme on plea rates and case
delay. University of New South Wales Law
Journal, 18(2),
211– 231.
63.
WeatherburnD.MatkaE.LindB. (1995). Sentence indication scheme
evaluation: Final report. Sydney,
Australia: New South Wales Bureau of Crime
Statistics and Research.
64.
WeinbergM. (2000). The criminal trial process
and the problem of delay. Criminal trial reform
conference. Melbourne:
Australasian Institution of Judicial
Administration. Retrieved May 1, 2007, from http://www.aija.org.au/ctr/WEINBERG.htm
65.
WeinbergM. (2008, October). The Australian justice
system: What is right and what is wrong with it? The Australia Justice
system in 2020. Sydney, Australia:
National Judicial College of
Australia.
66.
WillisJ. (1985). Sentencing discount for
guilty pleas. Australian and New Zealand Journal of
Criminology, 18(3),
131–146.
