Dangerous offender

Last updated

In Canada and England and Wales, certain convicted persons may be designated as dangerous offenders and subject to a longer, or indefinite, term of imprisonment in order to protect the public. Dangerousness in law is a legal establishment of the risk that a person poses to cause harm. Other countries, including Denmark, Norway, and parts of the United States have similar provisions of law.

Contents

The question of a person's dangerousness predominately occurs when decisions are being considered regarding the future safety of the public at various stages through a suspect or defendant's journey through the criminal justice system. This includes decisions on whether a person can be released on bail or requires to be remanded in police custody, followed by sentencing for certain offences, their confinement (such as what category of prison to send them to), as well as future legal proceedings, such as their suitability to be released, assessed by a parole board. [1]

Worldwide

Canada

In Canadian criminal law, a convicted person who is designated a dangerous offender may be subjected to an indeterminate prison sentence, whether or not the crime carries a life sentence. [2] The purpose of the legislation is to detain offenders who are deemed too dangerous to be released into society because of their violent tendencies, but whose sentences would not necessarily keep them incarcerated under other legislation, such as the Correctional and Conditional Release Act. Under subsection 761(1) of the Criminal Code, the Parole Board of Canada is required to review the case of an offender with a dangerous offender label after seven years, and parole may be granted as circumstances warrant, but the offender would remain under supervision indefinitely. After the initial review, the Parole Board must conduct subsequent reviews every two years. [3] According to Corrections Canada, on average 24 dangerous offenders are admitted to the Canadian prison system each year.[ citation needed ] Paul Bernardo is one well-known dangerous offender.

The dangerous offender provisions have been found constitutional: "The individual, on a finding of guilty, is being sentenced for the 'serious personal injury offence' for which he was convicted, albeit in a different way than would ordinarily be done. He is not being punished for what he might do. The punishment flows from the actual commission of a specific offence." [4]

On 17 October 2006, the Canadian government introduced legislation that made it easier for Crown prosecutors to obtain dangerous offender designations. The amendments provide, among other things, that an offender found guilty of a third conviction of a designated violent or sexual offence must prove that he or she does not qualify as a dangerous offender. [5] This legislation was passed in 2008. Under previous legislation, the Crown had to prove that the individual qualified as a dangerous offender. The amendment reverses the onus for individuals convicted of three violent offences. Such individuals must now demonstrate to a court that despite the three convictions, they should not be designated as dangerous offenders.

As of 2019–2020, there were 874 persons with the dangerous offender designation. Of these 874 designated offenders, 743 (85%) were in custody, whereas 131 (15%) were on conditional release in the community. [6]

Canadian courts also have the option of designating convicts "long term offenders". A hearing is held after sentencing, and, if a judge rules the accused is likely to re-offend after release, a 10-year period of community supervision is required after the sentence is completed.[ citation needed ]

Denmark

In Denmark, offenders who commit dangerous crimes, such as murder, arson, assault, rape, child molestation or robbery may receive a "custody sentence" (Danish : forvaringsdom), which lacks a definite time period. This sentence is often bestowed on offenders with deviant personalities (for example, antisocial personality disorder). The detainees are typically housed in the Institution of Herstedvester. [7] [8] There are periodic pardoning reviews and on average the offenders serve 14 years and 7 months before being released. [9]

England and Wales

In England and Wales, the sentencing of dangerous offenders is governed by the Sentencing Act 2020. [10] : Ch. 6  It was governed by sections 224–236 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, until the repeal of those sections by the Sentencing Act 2020. [10] : s. 413, Sch. 28 

The assessment of dangerousness is a statutory part of the law on a defendant being sentenced for specified violent, sexual or terrorism offences. [11] The court may take into account as prior convictions that the offender has, from a court in any place in the world, as well as information about a pattern of behaviour, including in which any offences, either the ones on trial or previously tried, have involved. Previous proceedings that could be taken into account are disciplinary proceedings or convictions if the person was part of the armed forces, or any civil proceedings. [12] The court should consider the level of danger the public are at risk to by the defendant and whether there is a 'reliable estimate' of how long they will remain a danger.

Case law

  • Lang and others [2005] EWCA Crim 2864 provides that for a person to be dangerous, the risk a person poses must be considerable. It should not be assumed that a significant risk exists because a 'foreseen offence is serious'. [13] [14]
  • Johnson [2006] EWCA Crim 2486 provides that the existence of previous convictions does 'not compel such a finding' in the same way the absence of previous convictions does not preclude a defendant from being found dangerous. [14] [15]
  • R v Considine; R v Davis [2007] EWCA Crim 1166 provides that the crucial word in assessing dangerousness is 'information', meaning that this is not restricted to evidence, previous convictions of behavioural patterns of a defendant. However, it is not appropriate for a Newton hearing to decide 'whether the defendant had committed a discrete, but similar, offence to the one before the court', just for the purpose of assessing dangerousness. [14] [16]

United States

In the United States, "Dangerous offender" statutes are defined on a state-by-state basis and are applied at sentencing such that the enhanced "dangerous offender" sentence stems from the original illegal activity.[ examples needed ] A person under "dangerous offender" sentencing is typically held for a minimum term that coincides with the sentence the person would have received without the "dangerous offender" sentence, and thereafter is subject to review of the person's state of mind as a determination of eligibility for release.[ citation needed ]

Alternatively, a person can be civilly committed if a judicial hearing determines that a concurrent mental disorder makes the person likely to remain dangerous because of a lack of self-control. This issue arose in the case of sex offenders in Kansas v. Hendricks (1997) in which the court did allow limited commitment; the court reversed itself on the very same issue in Kansas v. Crane (2002) imposing much stricter commitment standards and a higher burden of proof. [17] Various state and federal sex offender registry laws impose additional post-conviction requirements for sex offenders.

Known criminals designated as dangerous offenders

Related Research Articles

Life imprisonment is any sentence of imprisonment for a crime under which convicted criminals are to remain in prison for the rest of their natural lives. Crimes that warrant life imprisonment are usually violent and/or dangerous. Examples of crimes that result in life sentences are murder, torture, terrorism, child abuse resulting in death, rape, espionage, treason, Illegal drug trade, Drug prohibition, human trafficking, severe fraud and financial crimes, aggravated Property damage, arson, hate crime, kidnapping, burglary, and robbery, piracy, aircraft hijacking, and genocide.

A pardon is a government decision to allow a person to be relieved of some or all of the legal consequences resulting from a criminal conviction. A pardon may be granted before or after conviction for the crime, depending on the laws of the jurisdiction.

The rule of felony murder is a legal doctrine in some common law jurisdictions that broadens the crime of murder: when someone is killed in the commission of a dangerous or enumerated crime, the offender, and also the offender's accomplices or co-conspirators, may be found guilty of murder.

Assault occasioning grievous bodily harm is a term used in English criminal law to describe the severest forms of battery. It refers to two offences that are created by sections 18 and 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861. The distinction between these two sections is the requirement of specific intent for section 18; the offence under section 18 is variously referred to as "wounding with intent" or "causing grievous bodily harm with intent", whereas the offence under section 20 is variously referred to as "unlawful wounding", "malicious wounding" or "inflicting grievous bodily harm".

Mandatory sentencing requires that offenders serve a predefined term of imprisonment for certain crimes, commonly serious or violent offenses. Judges are bound by law; these sentences are produced through the legislature, not the judicial system. They are instituted to expedite the sentencing process and limit the possibility of irregularity of outcomes due to judicial discretion. Mandatory sentences are typically given to people who are convicted of certain serious and/or violent crimes, and require a prison sentence. Mandatory sentencing laws vary across nations; they are more prevalent in common law jurisdictions because civil law jurisdictions usually prescribe minimum and maximum sentences for every type of crime in explicit laws.

A habitual offender, repeat offender, or career criminal is a person convicted of a crime who was previously convicted of other crimes. Various state and jurisdictions may have laws targeting habitual offenders, and specifically providing for enhanced or exemplary punishments or other sanctions. They are designed to counter criminal recidivism by physical incapacitation via imprisonment.

Preventive detention is an imprisonment that is putatively justified for non-punitive purposes, most often to prevent further criminal acts.

Assault occasioning actual bodily harm is a statutory offence of aggravated assault in England and Wales, Northern Ireland, the Australian Capital Territory, New South Wales, Hong Kong and the Solomon Islands. It has been abolished in the Republic of Ireland and in South Australia, but replaced with a similar offence.

A discharge is a type of sentence imposed by a court whereby no punishment is imposed.

In England and Wales, life imprisonment is a sentence that lasts until the death of the prisoner, although in most cases the prisoner will be eligible for early release after a minimum term set by the judge. In exceptional cases a judge may impose a "whole life order", meaning that the offender is never considered for parole, although they may still be released on compassionate grounds at the discretion of the Home Secretary. Whole life orders are usually imposed for aggravated murder, and can only be imposed where the offender was at least 21 years old at the time of the offence being committed.

Causing death by dangerous driving is a statutory offence in England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, as well as Hong Kong. It is an aggravated form of dangerous driving. In the UK, it was created by section 1 of the Road Traffic Act 1988, and in Hong Kong it was created by section 36 of the Road Traffic Ordinance.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice Act 2003</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice Act 2003 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom. It is a wide-ranging measure introduced to modernise many areas of the criminal justice system in England and Wales and, to a lesser extent, in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Large portions of the act were repealed and replaced by the Sentencing Act 2020.

Murder is an offence under the common law legal system of England and Wales. It is considered the most serious form of homicide, in which one person kills another with the intention to unlawfully cause either death or serious injury. The element of intentionality was originally termed malice aforethought, although it required neither malice nor premeditation. Baker, chapter 14 states that many killings done with a high degree of subjective recklessness were treated as murder from the 12th century right through until the 1974 decision in DPP v Hyam.

In the English law of homicide, manslaughter is a less serious offence than murder, the differential being between levels of fault based on the mens rea or by reason of a partial defence. In England and Wales, a common practice is to prefer a charge of murder, with the judge or defence able to introduce manslaughter as an option. The jury then decides whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty of either murder or manslaughter. On conviction for manslaughter, sentencing is at the judge's discretion, whereas a sentence of life imprisonment is mandatory on conviction for murder. Manslaughter may be either voluntary or involuntary, depending on whether the accused has the required mens rea for murder.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008</span> United Kingdom legislation

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 is an Act of the Parliament of the United Kingdom which makes significant changes in many areas of the criminal justice system in England and Wales and, to a lesser extent, in Scotland and Northern Ireland. In particular, it changes the law relating to custodial sentences and the early release of prisoners to reduce prison overcrowding, which reached crisis levels in 2008. It also reduces the right of prison officers to take industrial action, and changed the law on the deportation of foreign criminals. It received royal assent on 8 May 2008, but most of its provisions came into force on various later dates. Many sections came into force on 14 July 2008.

Indefinite imprisonment or indeterminate imprisonment is the imposition of a sentence of imprisonment with no definite period of time set during sentencing. It was imposed by certain nations in the past, before the drafting of the United Nations Convention against Torture (CAT). The length of an indefinite imprisonment was determined during imprisonment based on the inmate's conduct. The inmate could have been returned to society or be kept in prison for life.

Life imprisonment in Canada is a criminal sentence for certain offences that lasts for the offender’s life. Parole is possible, but even if paroled, the offender remains under the supervision of Corrections Canada for their lifetime, and can be returned to prison for parole violations.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Criminal sentencing in Canada</span> Overview of criminal sentencing in Canada

Canadian criminal law is governed by the Criminal Code, which includes the principles and powers in relation to criminal sentencing in Canada.

Rape is a statutory offence in England and Wales. The offence is created by section 1 of the Sexual Offences Act 2003:

(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—

(2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.
(3) Sections 75 and 76 apply to an offence under this section.

(4) A person guilty of an offence under this section is liable, on conviction on indictment, to imprisonment for life.

Sentencing in England and Wales refers to a bench of magistrates or district judge in a magistrate's court or a judge in the Crown Court passing sentence on a person found guilty of a criminal offence. In deciding the sentence, the court will take into account a number of factors: the type of offence and how serious it is, the timing of any plea of guilty, the defendant's character and antecedents, including their criminal record and the defendant's personal circumstances such as their financial circumstances in the case of a fine being imposed.

References

  1. ↑ Zimring, Hawkins, Franklin E. Gordon (1986). "Dangerousness and Criminal Justice" . Retrieved 6 March 2024.
  2. ↑ Criminal Code definition of 'serious personal injury offence, which is the basis for a dangerous offender application
  3. ↑ Criminal Code, R.S.C. 1985, c. C-46, s. 752
  4. ↑ R. v. Lyons
  5. ↑ "Minister of Justice Proposes Stringent New Rules to Protect Canadians from Dangerous and High-Risk Offenders". 17 October 2006. Archived from the original on 6 March 2007. Retrieved 7 March 2007.
  6. ↑ Government of Canada, Correctional Service of Canada (19 April 2021). "Dangerous Offenders under Federal Supervision: 2014-15 to 2019-20". www.csc-scc.gc.ca. Retrieved 7 June 2023.
  7. ↑ Brun, A. (23 February 2016). "Det betyder en forvaringsdom" [The meaning of a custody sentence] (in Danish). DR Øst. Retrieved 25 April 2018.
  8. ↑ "Indsat uden slutdato" [Convicted without end-date] (in Danish). Herstedvester Fængsel. Archived from the original on 25 April 2018. Retrieved 25 April 2018.
  9. ↑ Quass, M.L. (28 February 2017). "Ekspert i kriminologi: Forvaring er en særligt streng sanktion" [Expert in criminology: custody sentence is an especially severe sentence] (in Danish). DR News . Retrieved 25 April 2018.
  10. 1 2 Sentencing Act 2020
  11. ↑ "Dangerousness Definition | Legal Glossary | LexisNexis". www.lexisnexis.co.uk. Retrieved 6 March 2024.
  12. ↑ "Criminal Justice Act 2003". www.legislation.gov.uk. Retrieved 6 March 2024.
  13. ↑ THE VICE PRESIDENT
    (LORD JUSTICE ROSE)
    MR JUSTICE NELSON
    MRS JUSTICE SWIFT (3 November 2005), Lang,& Ors, R. v [2005] EWCA Crim 2864 , retrieved 6 March 2024
  14. 1 2 3 "Sentencing Dangerous Offenders | The Crown Prosecution Service". www.cps.gov.uk. Retrieved 6 March 2024.
  15. ↑ THE PRESIDENT OF THE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
    MR JUSTICE GOLDRING
    and
    MR JUSTICE OWEN (20 October 2006), Johnson, R v [2006] EWCA Crim 2486 , retrieved 6 March 2024
  16. ↑ THE PRESIDENT OF THE QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
    LORD JUSTICE GAGE
    MR JUSTICE GOLDRING
    MRS JUSTICE RAFFERTY
    and
    MRS JUSTICE SWIFT (6 June 2007), Considine, R v [2007] EWCA Crim 1166 , retrieved 6 March 2024
  17. ↑ "Children's Bureau Express Online Digest: Supreme Court Decision Will Impact Civil Confinement of Sex Offenders". cbexpress.acf.hhs.gov. Archived from the original on 5 November 2004. Retrieved 15 March 2008.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.