Mandatory Minimum Sentences

docx

School

Moi University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

Subject

Law

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by EarlWorldApe6

1 Mandatory Minimum Sentences First Name, middle initial(s), last name Department, University/College Course Number: Course Name Instructor’s Name Due Date

2 Mandatory Minimum Sentences A mandatory minimum sentence is one that imposes a set term of incarceration on a prisoner no matter the nature of the offence or the defendant's personal history. This sentencing method is distinct from both fixed and discretionary sentences. Judicial discretion, criminal justice resources, and the criminal justice system are all seriously impacted by mandatory minimum punishment. This article will examine and contrast mandatory minimum sentencing with alternative sentencing methods, including determinate and indeterminate sentencing, and will offer a judgment on the use of obligatory minimum penalties. Determinate and Indeterminate Sentences versus Mandatory Minimum Sentences Determinate sentencing is a form of criminal sentencing where the judge imposes a fixed term of imprisonment and the offender must serve the whole term, less any time credited for good behavior or other circumstances, without the possibility of parole ( King, 2015) . The seriousness of the crime and the offender's prior record are major factors in determining the duration of the sentence ( King, 2015) . This style of sentencing allows for greater leeway in sentence length and early release than indeterminate sentencing, providing better certainty and predictability. When a criminal sentence is indeterminate, the length of time an offender spends behind bars is not established at the time of sentencing but rather is decided by a parole board or other body based on the offender's behavior and development in prison. Offenders who show good behavior and a willingness to change may be eligible for rehabilitation and early release under this sentencing model (United States Courts, 2017). However, this practice has the potential to introduce inconsistencies into punishment and may permit the early release of some offenders who pose a threat to society.

3 There are significant distinctions between mandatory minimum punishment and determinate and indeterminate sentencing. To begin, in cases of mandatory minimum sentence, the judge is required to impose a minimum period of imprisonment regardless of the specifics of the case or the offender's prior criminal record ( King, 2015) . This means that people who have committed crimes may be sentenced to lengthy jail terms even if they do not constitute a serious risk to society or might benefit more from alternate types of punishment. Second, mandatory minimum sentencing sometimes results in excessively long and severe punishments, especially for drug offenses. This is due to the fact that mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenses are sometimes determined not by the offender's actual role in the crime or the harm caused by the crime, but by the quantity of narcotics involved in the crime (United States Courts, 2017). This can lead to less serious drug offenders obtaining harsher punishments than those who played a more significant role in the crime or caused more damage. Finally, statutory minimum sentencing restricts judicial discretion and risks undermining sentencing's adherence to proportionality and individualization. As a result, judges rarely have the flexibility to tailor sentences to the specifics of each case or the offender's personality. As a result, offenders who are already vulnerable or disadvantaged may face harsh and unjust outcomes due to mandatory minimum sentence. Impact of Mandatory Minimum Sentences on Judicial Discretion The use of mandatory minimum sentences has greatly reduced judicial discretion in the sentencing process. Before mandatory minimums, judges had the authority to use their judgment when imposing a sentence based on the particular facts of a case and the defendant's circumstances ( Bjerk, 2017) . Judges would consider various factors, such as the severity of the crime, the defendant's criminal history, and the likelihood of recidivism, to

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

4 determine an appropriate sentence. The goal was to impose a sentence that was proportionate to the crime committed and that would prevent the defendant from committing future crimes. However, mandatory minimum sentences restrict a judge's ability to consider these factors. Judges must impose a fixed sentence based on the crime committed, regardless of any mitigating circumstances ( Bjerk, 2017) . This inflexibility can result in sentences that are too harsh for the crime committed or for the particular defendant. For instance, a first-time drug offender could receive a sentence of 10 years to life for a non-violent drug offense, which is much harsher than what the judge might have imposed under discretionary sentencing. Mandatory minimum sentences also contribute to racial disparities in the criminal justice system. Research shows that mandatory minimums have a disproportionate impact on people of color, who are more likely to receive longer sentences for the same crime as white defendants ( Yang, 2015) . This is partly because mandatory minimums target offenses that are more prevalent among people of color, such as drug offenses. Additionally, mandatory minimums remove the judge's ability to consider the defendant's background, which can result in sentences that do not take into account the systemic injustices and inequalities faced by people of color. Finally, mandatory minimums have also led to prison overcrowding, as many offenders are serving long sentences that do not reflect the severity of their crimes. This overcrowding has strained the criminal justice system and resulted in high costs for taxpayers. Impact on Criminal Justice Resources Mandatory minimum sentences have contributed to prison overcrowding, as many offenders are serving long sentences that do not reflect the severity of their crimes. This overcrowding has strained the criminal justice system and resulted in high costs for

5 taxpayers. According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the federal prison population increased by 800% from 1980 to 2013, largely due to mandatory minimum sentences ( Yang, 2015) . State prisons have also been affected by mandatory minimums, with some states reporting double-digit increases in their prison populations. The overcrowding of prisons has led to increased violence, poor living conditions, and inadequate healthcare for inmates. It has also strained prison staff and resources, making it difficult to provide rehabilitation and reentry programs for inmates. Mandatory minimum sentences have also contributed to the rising costs of the criminal justice system. Longer sentences mean longer periods of incarceration, which translates into higher costs for housing, feeding, and providing healthcare for inmates. The cost of imprisoning a person varies by state, but on average, it costs $31,286 per year to incarcerate an inmate in the U.S. Federal prisons spend an average of $36,299 per inmate per year, with the cost increasing to over $100,000 per year for inmates in high-security facilities ( Bjerk, 2017) . Mandatory minimum sentences also place a burden on the court system, as they result in more trials and longer proceedings. This means that more judges, prosecutors, and court staff are needed, which increases costs for taxpayers. My Opinion on Mandatory Sentences Based on the information presented in the United States Courts article, I believe that mandatory minimum sentences are an ineffective and unjust approach to sentencing. My reasons for this belief are: Lack of Flexibility : Mandatory minimum sentences do not allow for any flexibility in sentencing, as judges must impose a minimum sentence regardless of the facts of the case or the circumstances of the defendant. This means that defendants who may not pose a significant risk to society are sentenced to long prison terms, while others who may be a

6 greater risk are sentenced to shorter terms. This lack of flexibility can result in unjust and inconsistent sentencing. Contributing to Overcrowding : Mandatory minimum sentences have contributed to the overcrowding of prisons, which has strained the criminal justice system and resulted in high costs for taxpayers. This overcrowding has led to increased violence, poor living conditions, and inadequate healthcare for inmates. It has also strained prison staff and resources, making it difficult to provide rehabilitation and reentry programs for inmates. Ineffectiveness : Studies have shown that mandatory minimum sentences are ineffective at reducing crime rates. For example, a report by the National Research Council found that mandatory minimum sentences do not significantly deter drug use or drug-related crime. Instead, they have contributed to the over-reliance on imprisonment as a means of addressing drug-related offenses. Disproportionate Impact : Mandatory minimum sentences have a disproportionate impact on communities of color and low-income communities. These communities are more likely to be affected by mandatory minimum sentences due to systemic inequalities in the criminal justice system. Instead of relying on mandatory minimum sentences, I believe that the criminal justice system should focus on alternative approaches that consider individual circumstances and are more effective at reducing crime and promoting rehabilitation. Some of the alternative approaches include: Diversion Programs : These programs divert non-violent offenders away from prison and into community-based programs that provide education, job training, and other support services. This approach has been shown to reduce recidivism rates and save costs.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

7 Sentencing Guidelines : Sentencing guidelines provide judges with a range of sentencing options based on the specific facts of the case and the defendant's circumstances. This approach allows for more flexibility and can result in more consistent and just sentencing. Probation and Parole : Probation and parole provide an alternative to prison for low- risk offenders. These programs offer support services and supervision to help offenders successfully reintegrate into society. Conclusion In conclusion, based on the information presented in the United States Courts article, I believe that mandatory minimum sentences are an ineffective and unjust approach to sentencing. Instead, the criminal justice system should focus on alternative approaches that consider individual circumstances and are more effective at reducing crime and promoting rehabilitation. These alternative approaches can reduce prison populations, save costs, and provide better outcomes for offenders and society.

8 References Bjerk, D. (2017). Mandatory minimums and the sentencing of federal drug crimes. The Journal of Legal Studies , 46 (1), 93-128. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/690205 . King, R. (2015). Balancing the Goals of Determinate and Indeterminate Sentencing Systems. Fed. Sent'g Rep. , 28 , 85. https://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi? handle=hein.journals/fedsen28§ion=17 . United States Courts (2017) Mandatory Minimum Sentences Decline, Sentencing Commission Says [Online]. United States Courts. Available from: https://www.uscourts.gov/news/2017/07/25/mandatory-minimum-sentences-decline- sentencing-commission-says . Yang, C. S. (2015). Free at last? Judicial discretion and racial disparities in federal sentencing. The Journal of Legal Studies , 44 (1), 75-111. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/abs/10.1086/680989 .

Mandatory Minimum Sentences

Related Documents