Legal Dictionary

habitual offender

Legal Definition of habitual offender

Noun

  1. A person who is convicted and sentenced for crimes over a period of time and even after serving sentences of incarceration, such as demonstrates a propensity towards criminal conduct. Reformation techniques fail to alter the behavior of the habitual offender. Many countries now have special laws that require the long-term incarceration, without parole, of habitual offenders as a means of protecting society in the face of an individual that appears unable to comply with the law.

Definition of habitual offender

Further reading

A habitual offender is a person who has repeatedly committed the same crime. Various states 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.

The nature, scope and type of habitual offender statutes vary, but generally they apply when a person has been convicted a minimum of twice for various crimes. Some codes may differentiate between classes of crimes (for example, some codes only deal with violent crime) and the length of time between convictions. Usually the sentence is greatly enhanced, in some circumstances it may be substantially more than the maximum sentence for the crime. Habitual offender laws may provide for mandatory sentencing - in which a minimum sentence must be imposed, or may allow judicial discretion in allowing the court to determine a proper sentence. One example of a habitual offender statute is a provision requiring the revocation of a driver's license for a person convicted multiple times of driving under the influence

The practice of imposing longer prison sentences on repeat offenders than on first-time offenders who commit the same crime is not an innovation.[1] For example, New York has a 'persistent felony offender law that dates back to the late 19th century. These early habitual offender laws did not provide for mandatory sentencing.

Criticism

There has been various criticism of Habitual Offender Laws. Some examples are included below.

Unjust and unusual results

Habitual Offender laws, depending on their scope and discretionary room given to judges can lead to persons being punished quite severely for relatively minor offenses. The discretionary nature of the laws means that they can be applied unevenly.

In Australia laws relating to dangerous and Habitual offenders have been criticized as ignoring the principle of certainty in sentencing. Another major concern in Australia is the considerable disparity that exists in the requirements for dangerous offender status and in the available sentences for such offenders across jurisdictions. Age and offense requirements, indeterminate or fixed sentencing provisions, and review procedures are quite different from state to state[8].

Some unusual scenarios have arisen, particularly in California in the United States. - the state punishes shoplifting and similar crimes involving over $500 in property as felony petty theft if the person who committed the crime has a prior conviction for any form of theft, including robbery or burglary. As a result, some defendants have been given sentences of 25 years to life in prison for such crimes as shoplifting golf clubs (Gary Ewing, previous strikes for burglary and robbery with a knife), nine videotapes (Leandro Andrade, received double sentence of 25 year-to-life for two counts of shoplifting), or, along with a violent assault, a slice of pepperoni pizza from a group of children (Jerry Dewayne Williams, four previous non-violent felonies, sentence later reduced to six years).

Compatibility with Fundamantal Rights

The laws have been challenged on the basis of violating fundamental rights.

In the US on March 5, 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court held by a 5-4 majority that such sentences do not violate the Eighth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which prohibits "cruel and unusual punishment."[9]

References

  1. Franklin E. Zimring, Gordon Hawkins, and Sam Kamin, Punishment and Democracy: Three Strikes and You're Out in California (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 4.
  2. http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/PUB/C20.htm#aus
  3. http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/PUB/C20.htm#aus
  4. http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/PUB/C20.htm#aus
  5. http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/PUB/C20.htm#aus
  6. http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/PUB/C20.htm#canad
  7. http://www.lhc.gov.pk/rulesorder/vol_3/v3ch23-b.htm
  8. http://www.johnhoward.ab.ca/PUB/C20.htm#aus
  9. Linda Greenhouse, "Justices Uphold Long Sentences In Repeat Cases," New York Times, 6 March 2003, A1.

External links

References:

  1. Wiktionary. Published under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License.



SHARE THIS PAGE

TOP LEGAL TERMS THIS WEEK
1.     lex causae
2.     lex fori
3.     landed property
4.     lex situs
5.     ownership
6.     conclusive presumption
7.     sabotage
8.     AORO
9.     lex loci delicti commissi
10.     Miranda warning