Mandatory Sentencing Law

Racial inequality is growing. Our criminal laws, while facially neutral, are enforced in a manner that is massively and pervasively biased. My research will examine the U.S. criminal justice policies and how it has the most adverse effect on minorities. According to the Justice Department’s Bureau of Justice Statistics, out of a total population of 1,976,019 incarcerated in adult facilities, 1,239,946 or 63 percent are

In this paper I will illustrate racial disparity in sentencing in the criminal justice system. The causes of racial disparity and the reasons it is on the rise, the research statistics, and the proposed solutions are discussed.

The existence of racial disparity and structural inequality within the criminal justice system renders the concept of true justice for all unobtainable. The statistics of convictions and prison sentences by race definitely support the concept that discrimination is a problem in the justice system as well as the insignificantly number of minority judges and lawyers. There are a multitude of circumstances that influence these statistics according to the “Central Eight” criminogenic risk factors. The need for programs and methods to effectively deter those at risk individuals has never been greater and the lack of such programs is costing society in countless ways.

Similar to the Sentencing Reform Act, the purpose of the United States Sentencing Commission is to prevent inequity of sentencing among federal judges. It’s role is to serve as a strict guideline for Judges to adhere and limits the discretion at which a Judge may alter the length of sentence. The goal of this commission is to hamper factors such as race, sex, socioeconomic status, etc to affect the length of sentence, and aims for the guideline to stand on a neutral ground.

The Sentencing Reform Act is associated with the Comprehensive Crime Control Act of 1984, were the U.S. federal statute increased the consistency in the United States federal sentencing. The Sentencing Reform Act created the United States Sentencing Commission. This act allowed the independent commission into the judicial branch of the United States Sentencing Commission. It consists of seven voting members and one nonvoting member. For the sake of the United States Sentencing Commission, there are regulations that establish sentencing policies and practices for the Federal criminal justice system, which ensures a meeting of the purposes of sentencing. Judges are also bestowed the power to determine the legitimacy of convictions. The aspiration of the Sentence Reform Act was to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities among defendants with similar records who have been found guilty of similar criminal conduct Also to allow the Judicial system to process....

The mandatory minimum sentencing laws were passed as an effort to combat the war on drugs, with the anticipation that it would lock away high-level drug lords and discourage others from dealing drugs. However, the law requires judges to issue unwarranted, lengthy sentences without regard to the facts of the case. As a result, the law has overpopulated our prisons with nonviolent, low-level drug offenders, while the high-level drug lords are still free. This is because of the practice that one’s sentence can be reduced if they testify against others, and the high-level drug offenders have more to offer than those on the lower level. The Smarter Sentencing

What constitutes as fairness in the criminal justice system? Is it having a man put behind bars for more than 20 years for transporting a small amount of drugs to support his family? While a man can murder someone in the second degree and be sentenced to a minimum of 10 years? Is it right to take a parent away from their children for upwards of 20 years? The United States government thinks this is fair and allows for less discrimination in the federal justice system, this law is called the Mandatory Minimum Sentencing law. It has been around since the late 18th century, but did not start affecting drug possession until mid 20th century. Mandatory Minimums were initially designed to have a “cookie cutter” way to sentence violent offenders, but now has a role in sentencing drug offenders as well.

mandatory minimum sentencing. The Committee decided the guidelines would be set the levels in the Drug Quantity Table (Hinojosa 1998). This would be done to create a set standard for levels 26 and 32. see table 1 {Table 1 About Here} These levels would work along with a standard set of program ranges that are above the statutory mandatory minimum sentencing laws (Weld 1986).

Mandatory sentencing has operated as a controversial legal principle within Australia since its introduction in 1992. The sentencing principle has encountered issues such as the restriction it imposes upon judicial discretion due to its infringement upon separation of powers and the question of its financial sustainability. These issues compel an in-depth evaluation surrounding the effectiveness of the law and its social value while considering a range of reforms to improve the identified issues. Mandatory sentencing refers to the legislative implementation of a fixed minimum sentence for all commissions of a specific criminal offence (Roche, 1999). The laws surrounding mandatory sentencing require a court to impose a minimum term of imprisonment

In a research paper titled “The Interaction of Race, Gender, and Age in Criminal Sentencing: The Punishment Cost of Being Young, Black, and Male” three university researchers ask a series of question to determine if race, gender, and age have an effect on judicial sentencing, and how “these factors might contextualize on another”. The authors look at previous research to help in aiding what questions would be appropriate to ask for this study. They cite a number of different sources to help them achieve their goal of finding an answer to their questions.

The dissimilarity in cocaine sentencing is evident and might be followed to the dialect of the fundamental statute. Indeed, even without such a show reason for discrimination, African Americans have customarily gotten more serious sentences than comparatively situated whites. In spite of the fact, that it is in no way, shape or form decisive, there is significant proof that racial discrimination inside the criminal justice system is the reason for the sentencing dissimilarities that exist amongst Blacks and

Throughout the years, the question of whether those who commit the same crime should receive the same sentence or not has created controversy because of the mandatory sentencing laws, though, in reality, no two crimes are exactly alike and neither are the circumstances of the people involved. For women, in particular, the issue of mandatory sentencing has increased the population of women in prison. In the March 3, 2017 issue of the Congressional Quarterly Researcher titled “Women in Prison: Should they be treated differently than men?” the author, Sarah Glazer, had an anecdote given by Ramona Brant that discussed the involvement of women in a crime where they were not selling drugs, is usually due to a relationship, which they received the

First, Congress sought honesty in sentencing, trying to avoid the deception of pre-guideline sentencing system and empowering the parole commission to determine how much of the sentence an offender would serve as opposed to the former indeterminate sentence imposed by the courts. Second, Congress sought reasonable uniformity in sentencing by narrowing the wide disparity in sentences imposed for similar criminal offenses committed by similar offenders. Third, Congress sought proportionality in sentencing through a system that imposes appropriately different sentences for criminal conduct of differing severity (Grong, 2002, p 2).

Minority Experience”, 2011). Due to this some people feel that this led to unfair treatment regarding the minorities living in United States. It was found that during sentencing, there is a racial divide and unfairness, according to the Non Profit Sentencing Project. Their research group showed how decisions regarding a specific criminal case can be influenced by race. For an example, in some states the jury recommended an offender to death when they were accused to killing a white person, and furthermore, the use of the death penalty was given more when the offender was Black but victims involved were white. Another study showed that out of 60%, Black Americans almost always would receive a longer prison sentence than those who were white. From a federal standpoint, differences also included harder and longer sanction for Blacks than Whites. But due to the change of cultural diversity in United States there is a chance of change within the structure of the participants in the criminal justice system. This change can be a helpful way to lessen the prejudice or the treatment to the present minorities of the country. The influences and concerns of the cultural context can have an impact on the criminal justice system’s bearing in the

Minorities make up a small portion of the overall demographic in the United States but stand to make up a large total of the entire prison system. With some indications of bias along the line of justice enforced on the citizen with racial disparity, This type of system leaves a lasting effect in the minority community, affecting family members and future generations, exposes children to the depravation of a father or mother and may very well begin to plant the seeds for criminal activity destined for their