What is it about?
There are wide differences between jurisdictions when it comes to sentencing credit for time served. Credit ranges from zero to more than one-for-one. This paper examines conditions under which these different policies may be efficient.
Featured Image
Why is it important?
In recent years, this was an area of dispute between the Canadian government (which legislated that credit be reduced to one-for-one) and the courts (which stuck down the restriction). In the United States alone, almost half a million defendants are held in pre-trail custody. Some have even been held longer than the maximum sentence for their offence.
Perspectives
In writing this article, I was surprised at the lack of previous theoretical research in the area. Moreover, in conducting the research, there were a number of times that the math showed that aspects of my initial ‘common sense’ reasoning was wrong (the reader may sense this from the discussion after Theorem 1). Moreover, I think that previous empirical literature indicates that this is an important issue. Thus, I think the topic deserves more attention from economic theorists.
Derek Pyne
Thompson Rivers University
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: The effects of remand and bail on efficient sentences, Economics Letters, May 2017, Elsevier,
DOI: 10.1016/j.econlet.2017.02.020.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
