In the past two decades, major developments in guideline sentencing have taken place due to Judicial Discretion and Sentencing Disparities which led to dramatic changes by the U.S. Supreme Court in Federal guideline sentencing.
Prior to the implementation of sentencing guidelines, judges had total judicial discretion in determining sentence lengths leading to a wide fluctuation of sentences to offenders convicted of similar crimes due to the judge considering all information about the offender when sentencing.
A great disparity existed between judges; some were lenient while others were stricter this inconsistency led to sentencing disparity between judges. In response to concerns that judges were introducing unnecessary disparities in sentencing mandatory Federal Sentencing guidelines were set in place to create a uniform policy containing a fair and consistent sentencing range for convicted Federal defendants regardless of race, gender or class.
Congress passed the Sentencing Reform Act that led to the Federal Sentencing Guidelines. It is a guide for judges to consult when sentencing; it is based on both the seriousness of the crime, the offender’s characteristics, background (past and current criminal record).
The Federal guidelines made sure if a judge imposed a sentence outside the guideline but within the minimum and maximum range or if it misapplied the guidelines an appellate review was authorized (Carbines and Stith, 1999).
According to the United State Sentencing Commission a court may depart from guideline sentence if there are circumstances that are not adequately taken into consideration by the Commission when formulating the guidelines 18 U.S.C. § 3553(b). This departure policy was adopted due to the inability t...
... middle of paper ...
...
United State Sentencing Commission. (2011). Chapter 1 Introduction, authority and general application principles. Federal sentencing guidelines manual. Retrieved from http://www.ussc.gov/guidelines-manual/2011/2011 Findlaw for Legal Professionals. (2014). Blakley v. Washington. Retrieved from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=542&page=296 Findlaw for Legal Professionals. (2014). Gall v. United States. Retrieved from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=552&page=38 Findlaw for Legal Professionals. (2014). Rita v. United States. Retrieved from http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=551&page=338 Findlaw for Legal Professionals. (2014). U.S. v. Booker. Retrieved from
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=543&page=220
Furthermore, the “law and order” model was produced after a strong reaction between conservatives and liberal policies advocated by the national crime commissions. The conservative model originated in efforts to reexamine fundamental assumptions of the adult criminal justice system by a series of special study groups that began with the American Friends Service Committee publication “Struggle for Justice.” The committee’s desire to improve the predicament of prison inmates led to a report in 1971 that suggested that indeterminate sentencing and decisions about parole were conflicting and that they allowed biased judgment and improper criteria to control the timeframe served by inmates. Unfortunately, these motives for rejecting indeterminate
Ward, G., Farrell, A., & Rousseau, D. (2009). Does racial balance in workforce representation yield equal justice? Race relations of sentencing in federal court organizations. Law & Society Review, 43(4), 757-806. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5893.2009.00388.x
There have been different outcomes for different racial and gender groups in sentencing and convicting criminals in the United States criminal justice system. Experts have debated the relative importance of different factors that have led to many of these inequalities. Minority defendants are charged with ...
One of the problems with the law is its principle of removing judicial discretion. This severely hinders a judge's ability to make a punishment fit the crime. While some felons deserve life in prison, it is unfair to create a standard that would force judges to sentence offenders to life imprisonment for relatively minor crimes.
Belshaw, S. H., Caudill, J. W., Delisi, M., and Trulson, C. R. (2011). A Problem of Fit: Extreme Delinquents, Blended Sentencing, and the Determinants of Continued Adult Sanctions. Criminal Justice Policy Review. 22(3) pp. 263
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.
Kansal, T. (2005). In M. Mauer (Ed.), Racial disparity in sentencing: A review of the literature. Washington, DC: The Sentencing Project. Retrieved April 12, 2005, from The Sentenceing Project Web site: http://www.sentencingproject.org/pdfs/disparity.pdf
Sentencing disparity refers to the differences in sentences that are passed down in the same instances. This can happen on a variety of fronts. It can occur with judges, in different states, states v. federal, different prosecutors, among different victims, etc. (Criminal – Sentencing…2017 p.4) A more specific definition from USLegal.com states that, “Sentence disparity refers to an inequality in criminal sentencing which is the result of unfair or unexplained causes, rather than a legitimate use of discretion in the application of the law.”. There are a variety of ways that sentencing disparity affects the justice system. There are three factors that disparity looms around; they are gender disparity, racial disparity, and age disparity. (4
Racial Disparities in the Criminal Justice System “We simply cannot say we live in a country that offers equal justice to all Americans when racial disparities plague the system by which our society imposes the ultimate punishment,” stated Senator Russ Feingold. Even though racism has always been a problem since the beginning of time, recently in the United States, there has been a rise in discrimination and violence has been directed towards the African American minority primarily from those in the white majority who believe they are more superior, especially in our criminal justice system. There are many different reasons for the ethnic disparities in the criminal justice system between the majority and the minority, but some key reasons are differential involvement, individual racism, and institutional racism to why racial disparities exist in Institutional racism is racism that is shown through government organizations and political institutions. In a report done by David Baldus in 1998, he discovered that when it comes to the death penalty, blacks are more likely sentenced to death than whites, and those who kill whites are more likely to be given the death penalty than the killing of blacks (Touré).
In modern-day America the issue of racial discrimination in the criminal justice system is controversial because there is substantial evidence confirming both individual and systemic biases. While there is reason to believe that there are discriminatory elements at every step of the judicial process, this treatment will investigate and attempt to elucidate such elements in two of the most critical judicial junctures, criminal apprehension and prosecution.
Mandatory sentencing is not anything new. It began in the 1970s. The main purpose for mandatory sentencing was to try to get rid of the drug lords and to eliminate most of the nation’s street drug selling. It was to impose that the same crime would have the same sentence all over the nation. Some of the negatives that rose from mandatory sentencing were nonviolent drug offenders and first time offenders who were receiving harsh sentences. Inmate populations and correction costs increased and pushed states to build more prisons. Judges were overloaded with these cases, and lengthy prison terms were mandated to these young offenders. Mandatory sentencing is an interesting topic in which I would like to discuss my opinions in going against mandatory sentencing. I will show the reasons for this topic, as well as give you my personal brief on which I support.
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. One group believes we have a moral obligation to our country requiring us to do no less than lock up anyone with illegal drugs
The Sentencing Project. (2008). Reducing Racial Disparity in the Criminal Justice System: A Manual for Practitioners and Policymakers. Retrieved from http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/publications/rd_reducingracialdisparity.pdf
This research essay discusses racial disparities in the sentencing policies and process, which is one of the major factors contributing to the current overrepresentation of minorities in the judicial system, further threatening the African American and Latino communities. This is also evident from the fact that Blacks are almost 7 times more likely to be incarcerated than are Whites (Kartz, 2000). The argument presented in the essay is that how the laws that have been established for sentencing tend to target the people of color more and therefore their chances of ending up on prison are higher than the whites. The essay further goes on to talk about the judges and the prosecutors who due to different factors, tend to make their decisions
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).