Pros And Cons Of Mandatory Sentencing In The United States

Imagine you are a fifty-one year old man and you have not eaten in two days, and you resort to theft. Stealing a fifty-cent package of doughnuts from the corner store. You are at your home when suddenly officers burst in and arrest you. Then during your court proceedings, the prosecutor brings up two prior convictions from thirty years earlier so he can charge you under mandatory sentencing laws. This means a life sentence without parole over a fifty- cent pack of doughnuts. Though this scenario sounds too outrageous to be true, it happened to Robert Fassbender, a California man. States Attorney Yraceburn stated," Because of his (Fassbender) history of recidivism and the number of crimes he 's been convicted of," Fassbinder

In 1971, 1 out of 12 Americans were incarcerated. Since that time, the prisoner ratio has exponentially increased; today, that ratio is 1 out of 51. With that number continuing to rise, many problems result out of it. Prison overcrowding is a growing problem in the United States. The number of people being taken in has regressive effects on the purpose behind imprisonment. Though the prisoners are not there for a comfortable and enjoyable stay, ethical rights are being ignored. How can a someone carry out their sentence rightfully if the focus is taken away from them and put on the judgment of the courts and justice system? Prison overcrowding is without a doubt problematic and inhumane. The mandatory sentencing laws, lack of attention on

Due to the unprecedented expansion of the war on drugs by the Reagan administration started a long period of skyrocketing rates of incarceration. The huge number of offenders incarcerated for nonviolent drug offenders increased from 50,000 to 1980 to over 400,000 by the year 1997. In 1981, Nancy Reagan began a highly publicized antidrug campaign called “Just Say No”, as public concerns arose due to the portrayals by the media about people addicted to a smoke-able form of cocaine dubbed as “crack”. This campaign set the stage for zero tolerance policies implemented in the late 1980’s.

Court Judges, prosecutors, and even law enforcement officers very often cannot resist the urge to impart their very own passions and interest into the administration of justice. Far too often an individual’s social, background, and even financial status plays a significant role into the courts official’s decisions and administration of justice. The decision to impose a stiff penalty as oppose to showing

In The New Jim Crow, civil rights lawyer Michelle Alexander makes the case that the system of Jim Crow never died. It just took a new form in the shape of mass incarceration. Today, African American men are labelled “criminals” and stripped of their freedom, their voting rights, and their access to government programs.

In the 1980’s the introduction of Crack Cocaine which was much more addictive to the users and more profitable for the drug dealers than Powder Cocaine. The prompted the administration to create Reagans War on Drugs which was supposed to make a major difference in the use of illegal drugs. By giving a much stiffer penalty to drug dealers for possession an even a moderate amount of illegal drugs. The fear of jail time was going be a deterrent to reduce the sale and illegal drug use. A minimum five year jail sentence would be handed out to someone caught with 500 grams of powder cocaine or with five grams of crack cocaine. The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1986 focused on crack dealers with the sentence tied into the amount and what type of drug the

The are several types of sentencing that follows what is intended to be an impartial judicial proceeding during which criminal responsibility is ascertaining. Majority of the sentencing decisions are made by judges, although in cases such as death sentence cases, a jury may be involved in a special sentencing of the sentencing process. Unfortunately, sentencing decision is one of the most difficult made by any judge or a jury especially when it impacts someone’s life. Additionally, there are numerous sentencing models in the United States such as determinate, indeterminate, and mandatory minimum sentencing. First, determinate sentencing is a set term of incarceration and sentencing could potentially be reduced by good time. Offenders also have an opportunity to get time reduced off their conviction by participating in educational programs and community services. Second, indeterminate sentencing is enforced through releasing an incarcerated offender by a parole board that can be revoked for violating those conditions. In indeterminate sentencing, punishments are generally fit the criminal rather than the crime they are committed are convicted of. Third, the mandatory sentences are those that are required by law under certain circumstances such as conviction of a specified crime or of a series of offenses. By 1994, all 50 states had authorized several mandatory minimum sentencing laws. Offenders that who used weapons or illegal drugs may face additional time to their prison time. Under the terms of mandatory sentencing an offender is required to serve a specified amount of time before being eligible for release Siegel, Schmalleger, & Worrall, 2015).

In the past 40 years, drug offenses have been on the rise as a priority offense. According to Prison Policy, 1 in 5 incarcerated inmates are locked up for a drug offense. At the same time, black people make up 40% of the prison/jail population, which is more than the white population of 39%. Considering that black people only make up 13% of the nation, this disproportionate rate of black people being arrested is quite evident. Conversely, when it comes to drugs, black people are the highest demographic arrested for drug offenses, even though all races and ethnicities sell drugs at very similar rates. However, black men are arrested and charged for drug offenses at, “rates twenty to fifty times greater than those of white men” (Alexander, 2010). This discrepancy raises questions as to why are black men targeted for drug offenses more than all other races when black people use and sell drugs at similar rates as the other demographics. Mass incarceration stemmed from the influx of arrests made in the 1980’s and 90’s; these hordes of people put into prisons means more than just time behind

In the United States during the 1980s, cocaine was the sugar boost that many businessmen and upper-class whites indulged in to “increase productivity”. Cocaine was primarily limited to the economically superior due to a limited availability, which launched prices, and as a result the drug would often be used as a display of class and status that was hardly obtainable by minorities or the lower-classes. In the White House during the end of the 1960s to the early 70s was Richard Nixon who was socially disconnected from the counterculture of both the decades. Nixon, who was already in his late forties at the beginning of the 1960s, was simply too old to be a part of the counterculture of the drug loving decade, so Nixon had little understanding

Crime, its punishment, and the legislation that decides the way in which they interact has long been a public policy concern that reaches everyone within a given society. It is the function of the judicial system to distribute punishment equitably and following the law. The four traditional goals of punishment, as defined by Connecticut General Assembly (2001), are: “deterrence, incapacitation, retribution, and rehabilitation.” However, how legislature achieves and balances these goals has changed due to the implementation of responses to changing societal influences.

Let’s look at the punishment related to crack cocaine use offenses and how they are that much more severe than the punishment for illicit use of prescription opioids. Through this research we will come to realize that the only real difference between the two is the skin color of the people using them. With a rapid increase of deaths related to the misuse of pain relief prescription medications there is a frenzy in the “white community”. However, this same type of sympathy was unheard of during the black crack cocaine epidemic of the 1990s. Where the most aggressive drug sentencing laws to date were instituted, impacting minorities

The main reason of the use of mandatory minimums and a root problem of it is the legal actions of the War on Drugs proposed by Richard Nixon during the 1970s. This in turn led to a drastic increase in prison population and did little to help the people addicted to the drugs. Attempts to mitigate the strength of punishments being handed out such as the commission of decriminalizing marijuana bills of 1973 and 1977, as well as the Sentencing Reform and Corrections Act of 2015 have been turned down. A court case that involves challenging the mandatory minimums is the court case of Alleyne v. United States, where in a 5 to 4 decision the court decided that facts that trigger a mandatory minimum sentence must be included and proven to a jury by proof beyond a reasonable doubt. This goes against the Harris V. U.S This gives protection to the

Mandatory minimum sentencing requires a minimum sentence based on the crime that the offender committed (Levinthal, 2012). The majority of the laws involved illicit drug activity and is based on the amount of the substance that was in the individual’s possession. Unlike general sentencing, the judge involved in the mandatory minimum sentencing must follow strict guidelines that are provided. The judge cannot decrease the term of the sentence, no matter the circumstances that are involved in the matter. However, depending on the severity of the crime involved, the judge can decide to increase the sentence if it is determined that the factors require more than the minimum (Dahl, 2014). In the case of drug offenses, an individual found guilty for possession on the first offense will serve a lesser term than that of an individual who is serving time for a second

Like where I’m from Charleston, South Carolina the judges are very sided when it comes to mandatory sentencing. They Give people who have money or teens and kids who come from money a lesser

Sentencing methods and rationales are continually highly contested in the Criminal Justice system. Monetary penalties are particularly pivotal in these debates. According to Walsh, research from all corners of the world continually demonstrates that the poorest in society are more likely to be subject to the Criminal Justice System. This evidence Walsh argues, ‘cannot be ignored’, when considering which sentencing options should be used. The fine is the most commonly used penal sanction in most Western Penal systems. Fines are a historic type of monetary penalty which have remained incredibly popular. Outside of the United States, fines make up about 70 % of all punishments in the lower courts. The fine can be seen as a modest penalty, and appropriate, in my opinion, only if the offence was minor. Bentham sees monetary penalties as ‘ideal’. This I argue is incorrect. Monetary penalties have so many disadvantages that they should not be used to a greater extent in the criminal justice system. Thus some have gone as far to argue that they should be completely abolished. However Burch has said that this would not be possible so reform should be favoured instead. I will argue that updating their current use is essential in order to make the current system of fines more effective and more restricted. I will continue to discuss why fines are not effective, from their rational, to their effect on the offender to the way that they are set in practice. I will conclude