Read This And Find Out About Mandatory Minimum Sentences

Photo by Wesley Tingey on Unsplash

It was recently brought to my attention that an article making the rounds on social media is receiving a lot of backlashes. The article’s title is “Mandatory Minimum Sentences Don’t Work.” My initial reaction was disbelief because I had always been taught mandatory minimum sentences were essential to our criminal justice system. So, I researched the matter and decided to share what I found with you in this blog post. Keep reading if you’re interested in learning more.

Introduction

Federal Justice Law is section 802 of the United States Code among the most important and controversial parts of America. The section carries a minimum sentence for those convicted of trafficking illegal drug quantities. These laws are highly controversial due to many factors. The first is that the law applies to many defendant groups. Approximately 25,000 federal criminal offenses have been reported since 2010.

Federal drug law provides that the sentences for drug-related crimes under federal law are dictated through two systems. Having said that, there’s nothing more important in terms of if the minimums must be complied with. The U.S. Supreme Court developed the sentencing rules by the Sentencing Act of 1984. Sentencing guidelines are based on a grid that shows a sentencing range that corresponds with the categories of the offenses and their felony sentences.

Another example of a mandatory minimum sentence is California’s “three-strikes” law. Under this law, if a person is convicted of a third felony, that person is automatically sentenced to 25 years to life in prison. This law was enacted in 1994 and has been credited with reducing crime rates in the state.

Other mandatory minimum sentences include those for sex and gun offenses. In many cases, these sentences are controversial because they can seem excessively harsh, particularly for first-time offenders. Some critics also argue that mandatory minimum sentences disproportionately affect minorities and low-income defendants who are less able to afford a good defense.

Despite these criticisms, mandatory minimum sentences remain a popular tool for prosecutors and lawmakers who believe they are an effective way to deter crime.

BLUNT Instrument Vs. The Drug War On Drugs

Various states have adopted minimum requirements but are particularly often used when dealing with a drug case. Drug charges are generally brought on multiple individuals intending to commit conspiracies. In conspiracy cases, drug-related mandatory minimum sanctions are determined by the weight and quantity of withdrawals from the transactions allegedly involving each party. The resulting penalty for drug couriers for traveling alone is similar to the one ringleader that organized every shipment of a company.

A Waste Of Money

Excessive sentences can be costly and wasteful in their length. Average federal incarceration costs were around $32,000 per year for those in prison. The federal jail budget rose from 3.7 billion in 2000 to about $7.2 billion in 2017. The amount surpasses the federal government’s $5.5 billion budget that will help care for the homeless people in America. (The estimate is that over half the country’s homeless population was in a shelter in January 2014).

Description of the Data

The data used to develop the report are from the Monitoring federal crime cases series from 2011 through 2012. The data collection and organizing by the USSC consists of data on the entire number of cases in federal courts between October 2010 and September 2012. The data includes countless defendant information, including charges for drug conviction and type of drugs convicted. In a separate document, sentencing details can also be found.

Analyzing the Impact of Mandatory Minimum Eligibility

It analyses three ways mandatory minimum sentences affect sentencing. First, I’ll examine the proportion of drug defendants eligible for minimum sentencing. Second, I examine the mandatory minimums to see the likelihood that a sentence conforms to mandatory minimum conditions conditioned upon eligibility. Thirdly, the extent to which a person is convicted of trafficking beyond the minimum quantities threshold affects the sentence length and relates to the differences between drug classes.

1. Eligibility for Mandatory Minimum Sentence

Given the above definitions, 68.9% of federal drug offense victims qualify for minimums without conviction for any drug. Approximately half are eligible for minimums of 5 years, based on their re-offending record and the amount of the sentence. Not surprisingly, in some cases, the fraction of defendants suitable in this case is slightly different depending upon drug types. Nevertheless, this happens often unexpectedly.

2. Probability of receiving a mandatory minimum sentence

Section 4.1 shows that while the vast majority of federal criminals convicted of drug trafficking are eligible under federal law, a smaller proportion of crack detainees qualify for the national minimum sentence. As previously discussed, however, mandatory-minimum standards are not necessarily obligatory.

3. Impact of exceeding thresholds on sentence

All this research also brings us to another important question: How much impact do convictions on convicted drug dealers have on expected prison terms? How does this affect drug users in determining who was convicted? The following sections examine the question in a detailed manner. It should be clarified which parameters are being measured here. For clarity, I estimate the average effect of conviction on an offender’s expected sentence duration compared with the maximum sentence.

4. Interpretation of Results

These results demonstrate that over 50% of mandatory-minimum drug-related convictions for drug trafficking exceed the mandatory-medium term. The result may also be somewhat confusing. Section 4.2 indicates that crack-citric drug defendants who qualify for a mandatory-minimum sentence are more likely to receive an acceptable-minimum sentence than eligible defendants who have been found guilty of drug crimes.

Mandatory minimum sentences require the judge to give a minimum sentence based on the charges the prosecution brought to the case. Many countries are regulated in these terms. These laws remove a court’s traditional and correct powers in determining the factual circumstances in the offense and the character of each defendant in imposing the penalty. The federal Drugs Act in 1986 was substantially amended by an anti-drug misuse act, which now has lengthy prison sentences.

Conclusion

A recent review showed that federal law on drug possession has a subtle effect. Although first-timers are ostensibly eligible for mandatory-minimum sentences and the arguably rather lengthy sentences they have received in the past, most mandatory-minimum-admissible offenders with minimal criminal records avoid such penalties through federal safety-valve programs.

Media Activists For The 99%

Originally published at https://viableoutreach.com on July 17, 2022.

--

--

Avid reader and activist

Love podcasts or audiobooks? Learn on the go with our new app.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store