Your search

Although it has long been acknowledged that heuristics influence judicial decision making, researchers have yet to explore how sentencing guidelines might interact with heuristics to shape sentencing decisions. This article contributes to addressing this gap in the literature in three ways: first, by considering how heuristics might help produce the phenomenon of sentence clustering, in which a significant proportion of sentences are concentrated around a small number of outcomes; second, by reflecting on the role of sentencing guidelines as a feature of the environment within which sentencing decisions are made; and third, by analysing the guidelines from Minnesota and from England and Wales, theorizing how their content might interact with heuristics to make clustering more or less likely. Ultimately, we argue that sentencing guidelines likely affect the role played by heuristics in shaping sentencing decisions and, consequently, that their design should be informed by research evidence from the decision sciences.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Recent amendments have underscored punitive aspects in sentencing. This is apparent in the multiplication of mandatory minimum sentences, restriction of conditional sentences, limitation of credit for pre-sentence custody, and doubling the victim surcharge with no discretion for exemption. Apart from their specific effects, these amendments signal a reorientation of the principles and objectives of sentencing expressed in Part XXIII of the Code and in the jurisprudence that has evolved since 1996. They diminish the importance of rehabilitative and restorative aims in favour of greater retribution. As a result, they alter several principles of sentencing that remain in the Code as they were enacted in 1995 - including proportionality, individualization and totality. [PUBLICATION ABSTRACT]

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Over the last century, all common law countries have experienced a movement away from a highly discretionary sentencing environment to one in which judicial discretion is more constrained. (For general discussion of structured sentencing, see chapter 6 of A. von Hirsch, A. Ashworth and J. V. Roberts (eds), Principled Sentencing: Readings on Theory and Policy (3rd edn, Oxford: Hart, 2009).) Some jurisdictions have transformed their sentencing environments by introducing relatively inflexible and tightly binding guideline schemes. Others have taken a middle ground – creating advisory guidance schemes – while a third category has resisted all attempts to structure judicial discretion. This essay describes and compares the divergent histories of two jurisdictions – Canada, and England and Wales – as they have confronted the challenge of structuring sentencing. Despite similarities in the way that sentencing is approached in the two countries they have taken remarkably divergent paths over the past 25 years – and not in the directions that might have been anticipated back in the mid 1980s. After a promising start in that decade, Canada has rejected the adoption of sentencing guidelines, and elected to retain its traditional, highly discretionary approach to sentencing. In contrast, England and Wales has slowly, but surely, adopted a comprehensive and relatively binding set of guidelines, although this outcome also seemed unlikely in 1988.

Three decades of research on public perceptions in Canada has fundamentally shifted academic and policy approaches to understanding public views of crime and punishment. The contributions of Anthony Doob and his colleagues have influenced methodology, such as the inclusion of experimental design, and have supported an underlying commitment to understanding the public's view of crime and its relationship to policy. This article examines key findings coming out of this body of research and the impact of this work on current criminal justice policy in Canada. Despite the significance of this body of work on public perceptions research, the impact on current criminal justice policy appears to be diminishing.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

This article described three heuristics that are employed in making judgments under uncertainty: (i) representativeness, which is usually employed when people are asked to judge the probability that an object or event A belongs to class or process B; (ii) availability of instances or scenarios, which is often employed when people are asked to assess the frequency of a class or the plausibility of a particular development; and (iii) adjustment from an anchor, which is usually employed in numerical prediction when a relevant value is available. These heuristics are highly economical and usually effective, but they lead to systematic and predictable errors. A better understanding of these heuristics and of the biases to which they lead could improve judgments and decisions in situations of uncertainty.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Introduction: This review provides a national summary of what is currently known about the Canadian opioid crisis with respect to opioid-related deaths and harms and potential risk factors as of December 2017. Methods: We reviewed all public-facing opioid-related surveillance or epidemiological reports published by provincial and territorial ministries of health and chief coroners’ or medical examiners’ offices. In addition, we reviewed publications from federal partners and reports and articles published prior to December 2017. We synthesized the evidence by comparing provincial and territorial opioid-related mortality and morbidity rates with the national rates to look for regional trends. Results: The opioid crisis has affected every region of the country, although some jurisdictions have been impacted more than others. As of 2016, apparent opioid-related deaths and hospitalization rates were highest in the western provinces of British Columbia and Alberta and in both Yukon and the Northwest Territories. Nationally, most apparent opioid-related deaths occurred among males; individuals between 30 and 39 years of age accounted for the greatest proportion. Current evidence suggests regional age and sex differences with respect to health outcomes, especially when synthetic opioids are involved. However, differences between data collection methods and reporting requirements may impact the interpretation and comparability of reported data. Conclusion: This report identifies gaps in evidence and areas for further investigation to improve our understanding of the national opioid crisis. The Public Health Agency of Canada will continue to work closely with the provinces, territories and national partners to further refine and standardize national data collection, conduct special studies and expand information-sharing to improve the evidence needed to inform public health action and prevent opioid-related deaths and harms.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.

Disclaimer: This summary was generated by AI based on the content of the source document.