Access Millions of academic & study documents

Sentencing

Content type
User Generated
Type
Homework
Showing Page:
1/4
Running Head: SENTENCING 1
Sentencing
Name
Institution

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Showing Page:
2/4
SENTENCING 2
The discussion on whether there should exist mandatory sentencing options for most
crimes or if judges should be allowed to use discretion in deciding such cases is often times a
controversial one. There are some people who feel that there should be absolute mandatory
minimum sentencing set aside for certain crimes, however, others are of the view that judges
should be permitted to use their discretion in such cases for fair judgement. Personally, I
support permitting judges to use their discretion for most crimes, where they can act as
neutral arbiters by enjoining parts of the law in forming their sentencing. The judges should
be allowed to use their discretion because disallowing them to do so is a show of mistrust in
their credibility (Ulfstein, 2014). The absence of discretion of the judges can often times lead
to harsh effects, where there is no assessment of the real scope surrounding a given conduct.
More importantly, by using his/her discretion a judge can consider a number of factors in
determining a criminal sentence as part of his/ her discretion. Such factors include: the
criminal history of the offender, the mental condition of the offender at the time of crime, any
injury or loss resulting from the crime, if the offender expresses regret or remorse, etc
(Mackenzie, 2005). More importantly, the provision of the mandatory sentences by the
federal and state laws may have some aspect of sentencing bias in the pretence of addressing
judges’ leniency and inconsistence in deciding sentences, hence the need to allow the use of
judges’ discretion.
Nonetheless, under the judge’s discretion in sentencing, the defendants are likely to be
served with fair and appropriate sentencing. The use of mandatory sentencing may be unjust
because it does not consider a number of factors special from one criminal case to another,
but with the judges’ discretion, a defendant is sure of receiving a more rather fair sentencing
after an in-depth analysis of the nature and environment surrounding a particular case
(Mackenzie, 2005). For instance, a trespass and illegal trafficking of drugs may be subjected

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
Showing Page:
3/4

Sign up to view the full document!

lock_open Sign Up
End of Preview - Want to read all 4 pages?
Access Now
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Running Head: SENTENCING 1 Sentencing Name Institution SENTENCING 2 The discussion on whether there should exist mandatory sentencing options for most crimes or if judges should be allowed to use discretion in deciding such cases is often times a controversial one. There are some people who feel that there should be absolute mandatory minimum sentencing set aside for certain crimes, however, others are of the view that judges should be permitted to use their discretion in such cases for fair judgement. Personally, I support permitting judges to use their discretion for most crimes, where they can act as neutral arbiters by enjoining parts of the law in forming their sentencing. The judges should be allowed to use their discretion because disallowing them to do so is a show of mistrust in their credibility (Ulfstein, 2014). The absence of discretion of the judges can often times lead to harsh effects, where there is no assessment of the real scope surrounding a given conduct. More importantly, by using his/her discretion a judge can consider a number of factors in determining a criminal sentence as part of his/ her discretion. Such factors include: the criminal history of the ...
Purchase document to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.
Studypool
4.7
Indeed
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4