One Judge Makes The Case For Judgement Analysis

Americans believe that the more serious a crime is, the longer a person should spend in a prison. In reality it means that a law at discretion can sometimes just set a number of years that a person should spend in the jail, regardless of the situation. The time in the prison is often very long (Randall, Brown, Miller& Fritzler, p.216) because some states have definite

When we think about prisons, jails, and courthouses, our minds are meant to draw a connection to cold, hard, justice and fair punishments for guilty and deserving parties. Yet, in our judicial and prison systems around the world, this idea is nowhere close to reality. From inhumane punishments, to mass incarceration, and “trapping” people in the system based on race or financial status, justice is far from being served.

For example, there was a case back in 2013 in Alabama where a 76-year-old man, Lee Carroll Brooker, was convicted of drug trafficking last year, and a judge sentenced him to life without parole because of past robbery convictions in Florida. His son was also convicted. ("Roy Moore: Life Sentence for Drug Violation Shows 'grave Flaw ' in Sentencing." AL.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 04 Dec. 2015.) Brooker lived with his son in Houston County, and court documents show police found a marijuana-growing operation there during a search in 2013. Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore released a statement on this case as the Supreme Court refused to overturn the case. I mean really, this is just crazy how a petty drug offense can get a man life in prison and some other fool is let off easy, after committing an armed robbery.

While the United States’ justice system has been a model for many countries around the world, the injustice of certain aspects in our court’s system is prominent. Mandatory minimums are just one example the of injustice in our justice system. The Supreme Court has “…casted doubt on the constitutionality of the federal sentencing guidelines used for nearly two decades” (Kenneth Jost, 2004), despite this, nothing has been done to correct it. And while the idea of mandatory minimums is a good thing, they don’t work in the American justice system or in current American society.

Miscarriage of justice is reflected in various states across the nation, where there are far too many occurrences where individuals have been convicted of crimes and subjected to unfair mandatory sentencing. “Mandatory minimum sentencing laws require binding prison terms of a particular length for people convicted of certain federal and state crimes” (Famm, n.d.). “Mandatory minimum sentences imposed by statute are intended to achieve consistency in sentencing at the expense of individual consideration of the contextual sentencing factors” (Harvard Law Review, 2011). “These inflexible, one-size-fits-all sentencing laws may seem like a quick-fix solution for crime, but they undermine justice by preventing judges from fitting the punishment to the individual and the circumstances of their offense” (Famm, n.d) “Mandatory sentencing laws cause federal and state prison populations to soar, leading to overcrowding, exorbitant costs to taxpayers, and diversion of funds from law enforcement” (Famm, n.d.)

Rehnquist, a judge himself at this point, believes that mandatory sentencing is the result of knee jerk reactions from legislators. Not only that, but the sentences are unusually harsh on first time offenders, a group which is usually offered some form of leniency in light of the fact that they are not habitual offenders. Rehnquist argues that a better policy would be to return to former guidelines. This is the stance this policy seeks to take. That having such inflexible rules on sentencing does not account for the all the variables that are involved in a the legal process, such as the age of offender, past criminal history, mitigating circumstances and other factors that experienced judges would know to take into account when handing down sentences.

While reading this chapter, I was quite surprised to see the high rates of incarceration in the United States when compared to other Western countries. By simply examining opinion polls of Americans, it would seem that the criminal justice system is too lenient, which results in the propagation of the leniency myth. These findings have important implications for public trust and confidence in the criminal justice system. Confidence arises out of positive attitudes; if people believe that sentences are overly lenient they will have little confidence in the courts, regardless of the reality of sentencing practice (NCSC, 2007). On the basis of these survey findings alone, politicians, policy-makers and the media have concluded that the public

His article, “Putting a Price on Justice,” displays the rates and statistics of the elevated incarceration rates. Johnson Lero correlates the statistics with the increased cost of America’s prison system. He argues that there are numerous solutions to decrease both the cost and rates. There are many prisoners incarcerated that are nonviolent and are facing charges just like a violent prisoner. Lero states that this is happening because most judges, who do not pay for prison, are elected in office and avoid taking any risks that can harm their reelection. The judges conclude to send any possible threats to prison. The judges also do not pay for prison and Lero presents a solution that if each county had to pay for the prison, the nonviolent criminals could face other charges than being imprisoned. With less individuals being incarcerated creates a lower cost for prison. Johnson Lero’s article is useful for a research paper through the use of presenting issues with our current prison system and creating other solutions that can be beneficial to everyone. This article is also useful to support an argument in contradiction of America’s prison

It is a judge’s duty to uphold the law and ensure proper procedure and due process are followed during court proceedings. “Although extralegal factors are not supposed to influence a judge’s sentencing decision, studies show they invariably do” (Bohm & Haley, 2011). Ideally judges would remain unbiased, however, this is impossible as an interpretation of the law demands an individual’s perspective. This is why the higher courts, like the Supreme Court, are composed of several judges. Different interpretations are expected. Bohm and Haley explained some of the characteristics most likely to influence a judge’s decision during sentencing are “their prior experiences both in and out of the courtroom, their biases concerning various crimes, their emotional reactions and prejudices toward the defendants, and their own personalities” (2011).

One judge could give an unfair and unnecessary outcome while the other could give a lesser sentencePrison populations have been on the rise in past years due to policies for setting prison terms. This not only affects the number of people in prison but the time that they must stay in prison. “According to the new CRS report, a growing number of these prisoners are being put away for charges related to immigration violations and weapons possession. But the largest number is for relatively paltry drug offences.” (Brion) As a result many states have attempted to modify prison terms to reduce population pressure. “Some states are currently having many discussions they would not have had 10 years ago – getting smarter on crime rather than tougher on crime. None of these moves are comprehensive enough to address the large scope of the problem, but they’re very important starting points.” (Brion)In our textbook it states six basic policy goals of sentencing processes. One of the policies is determinate sentencing, which is a set sentencing of punishment in which the parole boards can no longer release prisoners before their sentencing is up. Mandatory prison term, states that legislatures are required a prison term to be imposed for convictions for certain

The Third Circuit erred in finding VHI have third-party standing, and his lower court’s decision should be reversed. In general, litigants do not have a standing to assert the rights of others, unless the litigant meet the constitutional and prudential requirement of third party standing. Litigants does not meet constitutional limitation of third party standing unless they sustain or will sustain injury that is actual and imminent. Steel Co. v. Citizens for a Better Environment, 523 U.S. 83, 108 (1998). Moreover, Litigants does not meet prudential requirement of third party standing unless litigants share a close relationship with the right holders, or unless the right holders have a genuine obstacle to sue by their own. Amato v. Wilentz, 952 F.2d 742, 749 (3rd Cir. 1991). Under this analysis, VHI does not have a third party standing because VHI does not meet either constitutional or prudential requirement of third party standing.

The author would have to say that the statistics coupled with the creation of the United States Sentencing Committee reveal that judicial discretion was at a much higher level prior to 1984, and has been on a decline as legislature has begun to regulate the discretion in which judges having in regard to sentencing in criminal cases. “Anderson, Kling, and Smith (1999) investigated 77,201 criminal cases decided between

During Justice Sonia Sotomayor nomination interrogative, she stated that, her background will never influence her judgement, but there are times where she has had consideration for his party since the law requires different results. She holdup herself on her earlier controversial statement that “wise Latino woman” saying that she was making a joke on the comment by O’Connor that a wise man and a wise woman would make the same judgment. With her experience with the liberal associates in high court, she was going to be a great team player. However, I believe the ideological and civic opinion can play a big role in the result of a case is affected by the judge of Supreme. Even though, liberal and conservative elective alliances on the court

"Restrictive sentencing guidelines and statutory mandatory minimum sentences have taken away the discretion of judges to tailor sentences to fit the individual circumstances of particular crimes and offenders." (Mauro, 2007)

For this assignment while wanting to focus more on crimes committed by a courtroom actor, I will instead write about the less known, but no less important appointment of a new magistrate judge for the Sothern district of Indiana. While to most the hiring of a magistrate judge does not sound like a big deal, but to law students who can recognize the importance of magistrate judges can appreciate the importance of this article.