Mandatory Minimum Sentencing Paper

The United States prison population has grown seven-fold over the past forty years, and many Americans today tend to believe that the high levels of incarceration in our country stem from factors such as racism, socioeconomic differences, and drugs. While these factors have contributed to the incarceration rate present in our country today, I argue that the most important reason our country has such a high incarceration rate is the policy changes that have occurred since the 1970s. During this time, the United States has enacted policy changes that have produced an astounding rise in the use of imprisonment for social control. These policy changes were enacted in order to achieve greater consistency, certainty, and severity and include sentencing laws such as determinate sentencing, truth-in-sentencing, mandatory minimum sentencing, and three strikes laws (National Research Council 2014). Furthermore, I argue that mandatory sentencing has had the most significant effect on the incarceration rate.

In her article Sheila Polk, an attorney for Yavapai County, Arizona, writes about how she thinks truth in sentencing laws or as she calls them “TIS” (Polk), has bought the crime rate down in Arizona, “since 1994 our crime rate has steadily dropped--an astonishing 42% between 1995 and 2008--as our incarceration rate increased by 18%” (Polk). This ties in with victim’s right advocates because by keeping the crime rate down that in turn keep the victimization.

In the U.S. the “War on Drugs” has been at the forefront of debates and discussion since it was formally declared by President Nixon in 1971. This war continues to have many problematic consequences today, the most notable being mandatory minimum sentencing laws for drug offences. This issue has been extensively researched by Kieran Riley with an article in the Boston University Law Journal titled “Trial by Legislature: Why Statutory Mandatory Minimum Sentences Violate the Separation of Powers Doctrine”, Paul Cassell and Erik Luna with a peer-reviewed scholarly article titled “Sense and Sensibility in Mandatory Minimum Sentencing”, and the Families Against Mandatory Minimums organization with a policy report. All of these sources came to the same conclusion, that the many negative aspects of mandatory minimums far outweigh the few positive aspects. Mandatory minimum sentencing laws for drug offenses that unfairly incarcerate people are against the fundamental values of the American criminal justice system and should be repealed.

If mass incarceration is a cancer of society, mandatory minimum sentencing laws are the tumors that exacerbate society’s condition. These mandatory minimum sentencing laws require a certain length of prison time if

In the article “Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: A Failed Policy,” the author highlights how mandatory minimum sentencing is a policy that has failed in attempt to put an end to drug crimes. Batey stated that the attempts of federal and state thought that they could “get tough on crime,” particularly drug offense, by eliminating the sentence discretion of judges and restoring it with long minimum sentences that applied regardless of defendant's individual circumstances (Batey 24). Moreover, the mandatory minimum sentences take authority away from the judge and give it to the prosecutor, who decides whether to charge the defendant with a crime carrying a long minimum sentence or much less offense. Withal, mandatory minimum sentences have failed due to giving America’s power too much power in plea bargaining, an imbalance that has led to the incarceration of persons too fearful to insist on a hearing that might have released them (Batey 25). Finally, Batey mentions that mandatory minimum sentence policy has filled prisons with the wrong people, which are minor players, not drug kingpins, and even some who are innocent (Batey 25).

Today, more than 2 million Americans are incarcerated in either a state facility, federal correctional facility or a local installation (Batey,2002). Due to longer sentences, incorporating harsh sentencing guidelines, and mandatory minimum punishments (NeSmith,2015). With each inmate costing taxpayers an average of $30,000 annually. The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 were increased sentences for a broad range of offenses, as well as establishing federal penalties for most murders and a large number of other crimes already subject to state law (Batey,2002). In addition to reducing the discretion of state judicial systems; as well as 85 percent of sentence satisfaction and establishing a mandatory life sentence for those convicted of three serious violent crimes or drug offenses (NeSmith,2015). .

Mandatory sentencing has been a big driver in the large population of incarcerated individuals in the United States. District attorneys are more aggressive in how they file charges against the arrestee. While the country has seen a decline in crime, new

Due to budget crises in states across the United States of America, state governments must cut funding to their punishment facilities causing overcrowding in prisons to increase every day. Overcrowded prisons pose a potential breeding ground for crime as hundreds of inmates are squeezed into small accommodations. Thousands of low-level offenders receive jail sentences each day, these criminals make up about a third of the inmates in the United States. In the words of Republican Governor Mitch Daniels of India, in the conservative National Review magazine, “We are imprisoning, in our most expensive spaces, more people for relatively minor, nonviolent offenses, like low-level property and drug violations. Some of our guests are not with the state corrections system long enough for any rehabilitation, substance-abuse counseling or job training to take place” (Katel). Evidently attention and change to this neglected criminal punishment system need to be addressed. This issue remains a troubling problem in our country, state governments offer the best possible solutions to prison overcrowding such as directing local officials to perform and improve prison construction, rethinking criminal law and responding to budgetary concerns.

Each year in America many people received prison sentences for crimes that pose little if any danger or harm to our society. Mandatory Minimum Sentencing in the American Justice System has long been argued by both Lawmakers and the public. We will go over some of the history of mandatory minimum sentences as well as the many pros and cons to these types of sentences. Some examples of pros and cons are the overall effect on public safety, the effect on the offenders, the cost to taxpayers, the lack of discretion for Judge’s, and whether the law should be repealed.

These individuals were sentenced to either a period of incarceration or to probation/deferred prosecution. Within this study, individuals arrested and sentenced for drug-related crimes in Maricopa County in 2009 were studied. In 2009, within the state of Arizona, 503 individuals between the ages of 18-22 were arrested for drug related crimes. Sixty percent, or 301.8 individuals, were prosecuted. Hence there is a population size of approximately 302 individuals. Thus, in order to reach a 90% confidence level with a 10% margin of error, fifty-six individuals meeting the selection criteria were be sampled. Using Maricopa County Sentencing records and Arizona Department of Public Safety data (both public databases), fifty-six individuals were sampled. This is a convenience sample. These public databases were used to collect re-arrest data from 2010-2013. Any recommitment of crime, during that time frame, was considered an act of

These measures were taken to ensure public safety but are now posing a problem for our correctional facilities. Overcrowding and budgets are among the problems brought about by these measures. Both the state and federal correctional population throughout the United States have steadily seen significant increases in their population, every year for the past decades. Based on the census found on the Bureau of Justice website, the data collected between June 30th 2000 to December 30th 2005 showed that prisoners held in custody between federal and state prisons increased by 10%. (“Bureau of Justice Statistics”, p.1 -2)

The increasing population in prisons has called authorities to consider parole because this program reduces caseloads for the parole staff as with small amount of cases, it reduces the time utilized on nonviolent criminals and alternately spent more on the offenders with high public safety risk. In addition, the parole calls for state to provide staff with appropriate equipment and mandate that enables faster procedures that does not necessarily require return to court that can lead to imprisonment hence releasing population pressure in jails. In Arizona, there has been a 12 percent drop in the prisoner population from Hawai’i. Its prison population has

There is a constant struggle in corrections to balance the safety of the public and achieve rehabilitation of criminal offenders. The greatest threat to maintaining this balance is the overcrowding of prisons. In 2011, the United States Supreme Court ruled that massive overcrowding of California prisons violates its prisoner’s eighth amendment right protecting them from cruel and unusual punishment (Boylan, 2015, p. 558). At the time California’s correctional institutions were at double their capacity, housing over 155, 500 prisoners in only 33 institutions (Specter, 2010, p. 194). The overcrowding of correctional facilities is one of the biggest problems facing corrections policy makers in the United States. The overcrowding of prisons is

Crime has been an ever-present figure in America even before America officially became a country. Where there is crime, there must be a way to suppress it. That is where prisons come into play. When a person commits a crime, he or she might stay in a prison while awaiting trial and might also stay in a prison as a punishment if that trial does not end in his or her favor. According to The Sentencing Project, as of 2015, the United States’ rate of incarceration was the highest in the world, standing at 698 people per 100,000 people. That means that nearly 2.3 million people in 2015 were behind bars. Because of this, the United States penal system needs to be extremely substantial, growing and changing to compensate for America’s growing and changing society. The American penal system has changed vastly over time, developing laws, practices, and major reforms to make it more efficient and effective; however, some question whether it is actually working.

(The Bureau of Justice Assistance, States; {For years, elected state officials responded to the public’s frustration with high crimes rates by making incarceration the centerpiece of their crime