The Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994

More documents

Recommendations

Info

percent in fiscal year 2000, 42.5 percent in fiscal year 2005, and 46.5 percent in fiscal year 2010." Arguments For and Against Opponents of mandatory sentencing point to studies that show criminals are deterred more effectively by increasing the chances of their conviction, rather than increasing the sentence if they are convicted. In a hearing of the House Judiciary Committee, Judge Paul G. Cassell, from the United States District Court for the District of Utah, described mandatory sentencing as resulting in harsh sentencing and cruel and unusual punishment, stating that the sentencing requirements punish defendants "more harshly for crimes that threaten potential violence than for crimes that conclude in actual violence to victims". A hearing in 2009 heard testimony from the American Bar Association which stated that "Sentencing by mandatory minimums is the antithesis of rational sentencing policy". In 2004 the association called for the repeal of mandatory minimum sentences, stating that "there is no need for mandatory minimum sentences in a guided sentencing system." A 1997 study by the RAND Corporation found that mandatory minimums for cocaine offenses were not cost-effective in regards to either cocaine consumption or drug crime. Some judges have expressed the opinion that mandatory minimum sentencing, especially in relation to alcohol-fueled violence, is not effective. In R v O’Connor, the High Court of Australia gave the opinion that when an offender is intoxicated, there will likely be a change in their personality and behavior, which will then affect their selfcontrol; that, while an offender may commit an act which is voluntary and intentional, it is not something that they would have done in a sober state. Intoxication is not a justification for criminal behavior, nor (in most jurisdictions in the U.S. and Commonwealth) a legal defense; but since an intoxicated person's decisions are less likely to be shaped by rational assessment of consequences than those of a sober person, deterrence is likely to be less effective for intoxicated people. Research indicates that mandatory minimum sentencing effectively shifts discretion from judges to the prosecutors. Prosecutors decide what charges to bring against a defendant, and they can "stack the deck", which involves over-charging a defendant in order to get them to plead guilty. Since prosecutors are part of the executive branch, and the judicial branch has almost no role in the sentencing, the checks and balances of the democratic system are removed, thus diluting the notion of separation of powers. Opponents of mandatory sentencing argue that it is the proper role of a judge, not a prosecutor, to apply discretion given the particular facts of a case (e.g., whether a drug defendant was a kingpin or low-level participant, or whether sex offender registration is an appropriate measure for a given crime and offender). When prosecutors apply discretion, they tend to invoke sentencing disparities when choosing among a variety of statutes with different sentencing consequences. In addition to fairness arguments, some opponents believe that treatment is more cost-effective than long sentences. They also cite a survey indicating that the public now prefers judicial discretion to mandatory minimums. Page 68 of 190
In 2015, a number of United States reformers, including the ACLU, the Center for American Progress, Families Against Mandatory Minimums, Koch family foundations, the Coalition for Public Safety, and the MacArthur Foundation, announced a bipartisan resolution to reform the criminal justice system and reduce mandatory sentencing laws. Their efforts were lauded by President Obama who noted these reforms will improve rehabilitation and workforce opportunities for those who have served their sentences. In their arguments they noted that mandatory sentencing is often too harsh of a punishment and cripples someone's livelihood for minor crimes. Australia, Mexico, New Zealand and some other countries employ a system of mandatory restorative justice, in which the criminal must apologize to the victim or provide some form of reparation instead of being imprisoned for minor crimes. In serious crimes, some other form of punishment is still used. People Sentenced to Mandatory Sentences Weldon Angelos – 55 years for possessing a handgun while he sold $350 worth of marijuana to a police informant on three separate occasions Leandro Andrade – 50 years without parole for theft of nine video tapes Page 69 of 190
Page 2 and 3:
Page 2 of 190
Page 4 and 5:
Page 4 of 190
Page 6 and 7:
Page 6 of 190
Page 8 and 9:
Page 8 of 190
Page 10 and 11:
4. Throughout the process, we encou
Page 12 and 13:
Page 12 of 190
Page 14 and 15:
Page 14 of 190
Page 16 and 17:
1 Timothy 3:2-3 2 Now the overseer
Page 18 and 19: This work is not meant to be a piec
Page 20 and 21: programmes "designed with significa
Page 22 and 23: Mr Clinton said at one point the 19
Page 24 and 25: Page 24 of 190
Page 26 and 27: The expression "Three strikes and y
Page 28 and 29: was, depending on the source cited,
Page 30 and 31: sentencing was considered so signif
Page 32 and 33: to overturning the three-strikes bi
Page 34 and 35: The second relates to the severity
Page 36 and 37: Religious Basis The history of puni
Page 38 and 39: potential pain associated with comm
Page 40 and 41: criminal justice system in itself p
Page 44 and 45: een applied to the states. On Febru
Page 46 and 47: ailable and non-bailable offenses w
Page 48 and 49: Austin v. United States In Austin v
Page 50 and 51: The "essential predicate" is "that
Page 52 and 53: The Court held that in the circumst
Page 54 and 55: Punishments Specifically Allowed In
Page 56 and 57: Professor Stinneford asserts that t
Page 58 and 59: without first punishing them suffic
Page 60 and 61: acknowledgment. Which further led t
Page 62 and 63: unfamiliar with the penal systems i
Page 64 and 65: In pre-1833 France, before jury wer
Page 66 and 67: imprisonment (for a person aged 16-
Page 70 and 71: Morton Berger - 200 years without p
Page 72 and 73: The practice of imposing longer pri
Page 74 and 75: The Australian Capital Territory, Q
Page 76 and 77: committee viewed that the act was a
Page 78 and 79: In the US on March 5, 2003, the U.S
Page 80 and 81: the Guidelines are now considered a
Page 82 and 83: United States v. Booker Though the
Page 84 and 85: In 2010, the U.S. Sentencing Commis
Page 86 and 87: Physical Injury (§5K2.2) If signif
Page 88 and 89: the circumstances are unusual the g
Page 90 and 91: Coercion and Duress (§5K2.12) If t
Page 92 and 93: established. In such cases, it is e
Page 94 and 95: any other reason; and (2) that did
Page 96 and 97: 10 6-12 8-14 10-16 15-21 21-27 24-3
Page 100 and 101: Notes _____________________________
Page 102 and 103: Page 102 of 190
Page 104 and 105: Page 104 of 190
Page 106 and 107: Page 106 of 190
Page 108 and 109: Page 108 of 190
Page 110 and 111: Page 110 of 190
Page 112 and 113: Page 112 of 190
Page 114 and 115: Page 114 of 190
Page 116 and 117: Page 116 of 190
Page 118 and 119:
Page 118 of 190
Page 120 and 121:
Page 120 of 190
Page 122 and 123:
Page 122 of 190
Page 124 and 125:
Page 124 of 190
Page 126 and 127:
Page 126 of 190
Page 128 and 129:
Page 128 of 190
Page 130 and 131:
Page 130 of 190
Page 132 and 133:
Page 132 of 190
Page 134 and 135:
Page 134 of 190
Page 136 and 137:
Page 136 of 190
Page 138 and 139:
Page 138 of 190
Page 140 and 141:
Page 140 of 190
Page 142 and 143:
Page 142 of 190
Page 144 and 145:
Page 144 of 190
Page 146 and 147:
Page 146 of 190
Page 148 and 149:
Page 148 of 190
Page 150 and 151:
Page 150 of 190
Page 152 and 153:
Page 152 of 190
Page 154 and 155:
Page 154 of 190
Page 156 and 157:
Page 156 of 190
Page 158 and 159:
Page 158 of 190
Page 160 and 161:
Page 160 of 190
Page 162 and 163:
Page 162 of 190
Page 164 and 165:
Page 164 of 190
Page 166 and 167:
Advocacy Foundation Publishers The
Page 168 and 169:
XVI for Drug-Free Communities Landm
Page 170 and 171:
Vol. VIII 2022 ComeUnity ReEngineer
Page 172 and 173:
Vol. XV 2029 Inner-Cities Revitaliz
Page 174 and 175:
The e-Advocate Monthly Review 2018
Page 176 and 177:
2021 Biblically Responsible Investi
Page 178 and 179:
The e-Advocate Quarterly Special Ed
Page 180 and 181:
Legal Missions International Page 1
Page 182 and 183:
Vol. V 2019 XVII Russia Q-1 2019 XV
Page 184 and 185:
The e-Advocate Newsletter Genesis o
Page 186 and 187:
Extras The Nonprofit Advisors Group
Page 188 and 189:
About The Author John C (Jack) John
Page 190:
Page 190 of 190
show all

The Violent Crime and Law Enforcement Act of 1994

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?