Multiple-Offense Sentencing Discounts: Score One for Hybrid Accounts of Punishment

Hoskins, Zachary

Abstract

© Oxford University Press 2018. This chapter examines one intuitively appealing legal practice for which retributivist accounts struggle to find justification: multiple-offense sentencing discounts. It also considers several proposed strategies for justifying bulk discounts on the basis of retributivism. Three strategies are discussed: those that appeal to an absolute punishment maximum, those that appeal to interpersonal practices of blame and making amends, and those that suggest that perpetrators of multiple offenses sometimes have reduced culpability. The chapter argues that each of these strategies either is implausible as a ground for bulk-sentencing discounts or is plausible only insofar as it incorporates nonretributivist considerations into its account—thus is in fact a hybrid view. It concludes by looking at hybrid theories as an alternative, suggesting that such approaches not only can provide justification for bulk-sentencing discounts, but are also more plausible in general than is generally assumed.

Citation

Hoskins, Z. (2017). Multiple-Offense Sentencing Discounts: Score One for Hybrid Accounts of Punishment. In J. V. Roberts, J. W. D. Keijser, & J. Ryberg (Eds.), Sentencing for Multiple Crimes (75-93). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190607609.003.0005

• Publication Date: Oct 19, 2017
• Deposit Date: Dec 2, 2018
• Publisher: Oxford University Press
• Pages: 75-93
• Book Title: Sentencing for Multiple Crimes
• Chapter Number: 5
• ISBN: 9780190607609
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190607609.003.0005
• Public URL: https://nottingham-repository.worktribe.com/output/1216584
• Publisher URL: http://www.oxfordscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190607609.001.0001/oso-9780190607609-chapter-5
• Contract Date: Oct 19, 2017