Question

What did you think of the issues surrounding mandatory minimum sentencing laws? How did we get here? Are they necessary? Is the intended reason for implementation working? Has society overall benefited from them? Are we safer today because of them? How has these laws led to an overcrowded court system? Do some research. When did the use of plea bargains by our state and federal court systems, begin to see an increase of use? What is the correlation of this increase to the war on drugs and the implementation of the mandatory minimum sentencing laws. What role has the War on Drugs played in implementing mandatory minimum sentencing laws?

Answer 1

The most glaring issue with mandatory minimum sentencing laws is how unfair they are. ... According to several studies, mandatory minimum sentencing laws are most often applied in federal court for drug cases, as discussed. However, the vast majority of federal drug defendants are non-violent offenders.Mandatory minimum sentencing laws remove judicial discernment from the criminal justice system. ... This can lead to harsh punishments that even judges say outweigh the crime.

The Cons of Mandatory Minimum Sentences

1. It limits the role of a judge.
Mandatory minimum sentences are mandated by the legislative and executive branches of government, at either the state or national level. It removes the authority a judge has for sentencing discretion because it treats every convicted person in the same way. By requiring a judge to hand out a mandated punishment for a crime, their role becomes quite limited. Instead of being an actual judge, mandatory minimum sentences turn them into an administrator.

2. It isn’t always applied as it should.
Let’s go back to that case in Montana where a 30-day sentence was handed down for a teacher raping a student. In Montana, the minimum mandatory sentence for a rape conviction, based on the charges filed, was 2 years. The judge decided to hand out a sentence of 30 days anyway.

3. It can be used to target specific groups of people.
Most of the mandatory minimum sentencing laws in the United States involve drug possession, drug distribution, and similar criminal conduct. The charges that are targeted for the most extensive minimum mandatory sentences tend to be those that minority groups are charged with the most. There are examples of 10-year sentences being handed out for having 1g of marijuana in possession. As a result, the minority population in U.S. prisons is very different than the minority population in the general population.

4. It is used for coercion.
Because mandatory minimum sentences assign lengthy terms to convicted individuals, the threat of a potential conviction is used by law enforcement as an interview tool. The goal may be to move up the chain of command, so the main operators of a crime syndicate can be removed, but because coercion is involved, there can be doubts to the accuracy of the information given.

5. It does not allow for extenuating circumstances.
Patricia Spottedcrow sold a dime bag of marijuana to a police informant. Two weeks later, she sold another $20 worth of marijuana to the same informant. She asked her 9-year-old son for some change, since the transaction occurred at her home. In return, they were sentenced to a minimum mandatory time of 10 years for distribution and 2 years for possession for $31 worth of drugs. She was offered a deal of 2 years in prison, but plead guilty instead because she felt that having no prior convictions and only a small amount of marijuana would be extenuating circumstances. They were not.