Compare and contrast sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimum sentences, and identify three aims of each type of sentence
What will be an ideal response?
Both sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimum sentences have three aims.
(1) Uniformity is served, which is the notion that similar crimes should receive similar
punishment.
(2) Certainty and truth in sentencing, or the notion that convicted offenders, victims
and the public should know that the sentence imposed is similar to the sentence
actually to be served.
(3) Guidelines and mandatory sentences promote retribution, deterrence, and
incapacitation, where the rehabilitation of individual offenders is no longer the primary
aim of punishment.
Mandatory minimum sentences require judges to impose a nondiscretionary minimum
amount of prison time that all offenders convicted of the offense have to serve. Judges
can sentence offenders to more than the minimum, but not less.
With sentencing guidelines, a commission establishes a relatively narrow range of
penalties, and judges are supposed to choose a specific sentence within that range. The
guidelines depend on a combination of the seriousness of the crime and the offender's
criminal history. Sentences are either presumptively incarceration or presumptively
probation. Judges can depart from the ranges set in the guidelines but have to give
written reasons for doing so. Additionally, certain reasons for departure are no longer
allowed.
You might also like to view...
Some advocate that terrorists through their actions have forfeited constitutional and human rights, and that the government can follow the policy of ______.
a. the ends justify the means b. two wrongs do not make a right c. let whatever happens happen d. retribution
In a collaboration relationship there is a(n) ______.
a. informal arrangements and low commitment. b. semiformal partnership and moderate commitment c. formalized partnerships and high commitment d. formalized partnership and moderate commitment
Victims and witnesses face frustrations in coping with the court process:
A. but overall exhibit surprising support for the system. B. and almost never show up for court. C. and overall resent the system as a result. D. None of these answers is correct.
A suspect is asked about a crime by a private citizen acting on their own without any police involvement. The suspect makes incriminating statements. These statements are
a. admissible unless the suspect was in police custody. b. inadmissible under Miranda. c. admissible because the Fifth Amendment does not apply to private citizens. d. admissible unless the suspect has been formally charged with a crime.