The focus of this course is on the management, administration, and/or leadership aspects of criminal justice organizations. The purpose of the Article Review assignment is to provide you with experience in the identification, location, and analysis of scholarly-quality information relating to the criminal justice field.
For your Article Review, you will research and select a peer-reviewed, scholarly-quality article from a quality web-based resource. You may address any general administration, management, or leadership subtopic that you find generally addressed in the Peak textbook. This leaves the selection of the general topic of the article up to you. However, the major focus of the article must be on a relevant justice management, administration, or leadership issue. As an example, if you have an interest in the corrections area of the general criminal justice field, you may focus your efforts on corrections. However, the article that you review must be on a management related topic that is within the general scope of the corrections field. Granting you the discretion to pick a specific subject area to research is not an open invitation to write on any subject that you just happen to like. Keep your focus for this assignment within the general scope of the Administration of Justice Organizations course.
Grunwald sought to question the Blackmun’s Thesis, “does the uniformity in sentencing entail unfairness?” and found out that there is an ethical dilemma in courts regarding uniformity in sentencing (Grunwald, 2015). Previously there has been a common belief by the scholars of criminal justice that sentencing guidelines increase uniformity in the sentencing cost of fairness. These scholars have previously reasoned that guideline system seldom considers all relevant features and consequently impose sentences in certain cases that are biased about the best or ideal sentence.
The bias effect has been the primary theoretical as well as the practical challenge that puts court judges and sentencing commissions in an ethical dilemma when dispensing their duties. Such a dilemma offer one of the strongest argument against compulsory sentencing guidelines. The article identified another effect of guidelines on fairness that had never been recognized by the scholarly literature.
Grunwald acknowledged the variance effect that improves fairness of sentences directly by enhancing uniformity. Grunwald used statistical simulation for examining the relationships between bias effect and variance effect. The outcome of the study gave a substantial evidence that the variance effects are relatively enormous, and hence can always override the negative effects of bias (Grunwald, 2015).
Under such a condition, sentencing guidelines will both enhance uniformity and increase fairness simultaneously. The topic relates to a biblical worldview that requires that justice is given to all without bias. Since the findings of this article reveal that variance effect will override the impacts of bias effects in courts and commissioning agencies, it tends to align to the provision of the bible, which requires that everyone receive equitable justice. The biblical worldview regarding sentencing uniformity supports the use variance effect of eliminating the mentioned ethical dilemma and hence proper sentencing.
The administrative concepts and ideas presented in the article apply to justice administration. The courts and sentencing commissioning bodies are key people in the criminal justice systems. Having the problem of bias effect would put the judges and commissioners in an ethical dilemma and make them impose sentences in certain cases, which are biased in comparison to the best or ideal sentence. This will lead to the flawed justice system, and hence it will not simultaneously improve uniformity and fairness.
By acknowledging and showing evidence to suggest that variance effect will give the alternative and ensure fairness and uniformity and the same time, this particular article has some merit to the study of criminal justice administration. The reason is that henceforth courts and the sentencing commission will have proper and ethical guidelines that will concurrently increase uniformity and fairness that is the sole purpose criminal justice system is established.
There is a great deal of biblical connection to the content of the article since the Bible itself promotes and advocate for justice for all. Since the article has acknowledged that the variance effect will overweigh the impacts of bias effect, it can be authoritatively be stated that justice for all will be achieved in both courts and commissions.
Ecclesiastes 8:11 is a relevant reference to the central theme of this article. It talks about when one is taken to court and say, that since the sentence against evil deeds in not hurriedly executed, the heart of the son of man among them is given completely to do evil. In this manner, the verse tends to support uniformity and fairness in sentencing. Deuteronomy 17:9 also advocates just and fair court and commission by saying that people shall go to the Levitical judge or judge in the office to inquire about them, and they will pronounce to them the verdict in the case.
Grunwald, B. (2015). Questioning Blackmun’s Thesis: Does Uniformity in Sentencing Entail Unfairness?. Law & Society Review, 49(2), 499-534. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/lasr.12141/epdf