More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on the marijuana policy project
Legalization of marijuana topic
Medical marijuana policy development paper
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on the marijuana policy project
Mandatory minimum sentence is a law that is one of the most popular. A crime that is committed and the recourse is mandatory minimum sentence the judge is not permitted to give a shorter sentence, even if the facts in the case would in some cases cause for a lesser sentence. “Judges are required to sentence any person convicted of one of these crimes to at least the mandatory term, regardless of the particular circumstances of the crime or the defendant’s criminal history” (Davis, A.J., 2016). But on the flip side, the judge is allowed ot give a longer or harsher sentence if the situation calls for one. An example of mandatory minimum sentencing regarding federal drug laws depends on how much of the substance the person is caught with. Another
The senseless and irrational analysis behind these mandatory minimum sentencing laws that left judges with no choice but to hand out deva...
“You are hereby sentenced to life without the possibility of parole”. These are the words that a juvenile in America is likely to hear. Collectively, as a nation, the United States has incarcerated more juveniles with life sentences than any other nation. With this fact the arguments arise that juveniles should not be punished the same was as an adult would be but, is that really how the justice system should work? To allow a juvenile who recently robbed a store only get a slap on the wrist? Not comprehending that there are consequences for their actions and how what they have done affects the victims.
A 1997 RAND Corporation study found that treatment of heavy drug users was almost ten times more cost effective in reducing drug use, sales, and drug-related crime than longer mandatory sentences (Echols, 2014). Other studies have shown that mandatory penalties have no demonstrable marginal or short-term effects on overall crime reduction either. Congress established mandatory sentences in order to incarcerate high-level drug criminals, but according to the U.S. Sentencing Commission, only 11 percent of drug charged prisoners fit that description (Echols, 2014). Most of those incarcerated are low-level offenders, whose spots in drug trafficking are easily filled by other people. Mandatory minimum sentencing is essentially a waste of scarce criminal justice resources and federal funds that could be used elsewhere, and The Smarter Sentencing Act’s reduction of mandatory minimums can be the first step in eliminating minimum sentencing altogether. Ideally, given the opportunity for discretion, judges would be more inclined to issue more effective alternatives to incarceration, such as rehabilitation programs and/or
Determinate sentencing is becoming more popular in juvenile courts. It is a special statute that allows for the possibility of a juvenile serving a sentence beyond the age of 21. It specifically covers certain violent offenses and drug cases, like murder, capital murder, sexual assault, and indecency with a child. Aggravated controlled substances cases are also covered (TYC website). The alternative to determinate sentencing is blended sentencing, which allows judges to issue delinquent offenders both juvenile and adult dispositions. Depending on the behavior of the delinquent while serving out their juvenile sentence, a fail-safe postadjudication stage occurs to determine whether or not their adult sentence should be suspended or invoked (Belshaw et al, 2011).
The criminal justice system has been in place the United States for centuries. The system has endured many changes throughout the ages. The need for a checks and balances system has been a priority for just as long. Federal sentencing guidelines were created to help create equal punishments among offenders. Judges are given the power of sentencing and they are not immune to opinions, bias, and feelings. These guidelines are set in place to allow the judge to keep their power but keep them within a control group of equality. Although there are a lot of pros to sentencing guidelines there are also a lot of cons. Research has shown that sentencing guidelines have allowed the power to shift from judges to prosecutors and led to sentencing disparity based on sex, race, and social class.
To begin, Mandatory minimum sentences result in prison overcrowding, and based on several studies, it does not alleviate crime, for example crimes such as shoplifting or solicitation. These sentencing guidelines do not allow a judge to take into consideration the first time offender, differentiate the deviance level of the offender, and it does not allow for the judge to alter a punishment or judgment to each individual case. When mandatory sentencing came into effect, the drug lords they were trying to stop are not the ones being affected by the sentences. It is the nonviolent, low-level drug users who are overcrowding the prisons as a result of these sentences. Both the U.S. Sentencing Commission and the Department of Justice have determined that mandatory sentencing is not an effective way to deter crime. Studies show that mandatory minimums have gone downhill due to racial a...
Mandatory minimum sentencing is the practice of requiring a predetermined prison sentence for certain crimes. The most notable mandatory minimums are the ones implemented in the 70’s and 80’s, hoping to combat the rising drug problem. Mandatory minimum sentencing has existed in the United States nearly since its very birth, with the first mandatory minimums being put into place around 1790. Recently, as the marijuana laws of many states have scaled back in severity, the issue of mandatory minimums has caused controversy in the US. There are two distinct sides to the argument surrounding mandatory minimum sentencing.
They are successful in immediately punishing the offender and they are also seen as “high in profile”. Following a sentencing, the convicted criminal is immediately escorted out of the courtroom and straight to the confinements of prison. This instant punishment keeps the convicted off the streets preventing more harm to the community. This also is a result of “high in profile”. Prison is the most severe punishment that the government can inflict on a criminal (including the death-penalty). Criminal sentencing is taken very seriously and is meant to scare lawbreakers from re-offending. However, rehabilitation does a better job in preventing
This paper will be focusing on the controversial issue of mandatory minimum sentences in Canada. There has been much debate over this topic, as it has quickly become implemented for the sentencing of drug offenders, drug-related crimes and banned firearm offences. I will argue that every case that comes through the criminal justice system is different and deserves a fair trial with a sentence that is not already determined for them. There have been many cases where the judge has no discretion in the sentence due to the mandatory minimum sentences pre-determined for the case, no matter what the aggravating or mitigating factors were. I will argue that the mandatory minimum sentences in Canada should be reduced or eliminated as they result in very few positive outcomes for the offender and society, increase recidivism rates, are very expensive, and in many cases are detrimental and unjust. Throughout this essay I will discuss two main cases that represent an unjust sentencing outcome due to the mandatory minimum sentencing laws. I will stress how it should be the discretion of the judge to individualize the sentences based on the offender’s mitigating factors, aggravating factors and background. Leroy Smickle is the first case discussed through the essay, which ended with the judge striking down the mandatory minimum sentences in Ontario due to the possession of a loaded gun. Robert Latimer was also a highly controversial Canadian case about a father who killed his mentally disabled daughter out of compassion to end her severe suffering. I will be using many academic articles throughout this essay to give empirical support to the overall argument.
Mandatory minimum prison sentences are punishments that are set through legislation for specific offenses. They have been used throughout history for different crimes. The four traditional goals of punishment are: deterrence, incapacitation (incarceration), retribution, and rehabilitation. With the state of our national economy, cutting prison and corrections costs would be a huge savings. On the surface, it may seem that mandatory minimum sentences would serve the traditional goals of punishment. They would discourage potential criminals, keep society safe for longer periods of time, they would punish the offender and they would rehabilitate the offender. What they did not do, however, is take into account the individual circumstances of each case and each defendant. Mandatory minimum sentences are not effective and they should be repealed.
Felman (2012) explains this by saying “in the last twenty-five years since the advent of mandatory sentences for drug offenses and the Sentencing Guidelines, the average federal sentence has roughly tripled in length” (p. 369). The development of these guidelines indicates that for the same crimes that individuals committed previously, they are now receiving longer sentences. Mandatory sentencing also suggests that no matter an individual’s circumstance, they will receive the same punishment as everyone else. Although this is a step towards the impartiality that the criminal justice system is constantly seeking, there are certain issues that have been found with what can be deemed as harsh, mandatory
Sentencing models are plans or strategies developed for imposing punishment for crimes committed. During the 19th century these punishments were normally probation, fines and flat sentences. When someone was given a flat sentence, he or she had to serve the entire sentence without parole or early release. However, by the end of the 19th century the new models were developed. These new models include indeterminate, determinate, advisory/voluntary guidelines, presumptive and mandatory minimum sentencing (Schmalleger & Smykla, 2011).
The sentencing process is created by some of the legislative parties, who use their control to decide on the type of criminal punishment. The sentencing guidelines for the judges to go by can be different depending on the jurisdiction and can include different sentencing requirements such as “diversionary programs, fines, probation, intermediate sanctions, confinement in jail, incarceration in a state or federal prison, and the death penalty” (Siegel & Bartollas, 2011, p. 40). In some jurisdictions, the death penalty is not included as one of the punishments. Being sentenced is step one of the correction process and is in place to discourage repeat offenders (Siegel & Bartollas, 2011, p. 40). Depending on the crime committed, the offender can be sentenced to a consecutive sentence or a concurrent sentence.
It seems like once someone gets out of jail, they end up right back in jail. Most claims believe that prisons don’t work. Examples on why they don’t work are things such as learning new things, not having an independent structure, and unfair sentencing. Most of the time, while someone is in jail they learn a lot of new tricks such as picking locks, making drugs, making alcohol, hot wiring cars, and a lot of other things that get them in more trouble once they get out of jail.
Mandatory minimums, harsh prison sentences imposed on offenders by law, where discretion is limited. Offenders, most of the time nonviolent, are faced with prison terms that are meant for a drug kingpin, not a low level first or second time offender. Mandatory minimums have been proven not to be the answer in our criminal justice system and need to be changed. Mandatory Minimums has created a problem within our society where we send everyone to prison and don 't present offenders with better opportunities. We have turned into a society focused on retribution and deterrence, and have forgotten about rehabilitation.