Federal Mandatory Sentencing Guidelines
Federal criminal sentencing guidelines have evolved from mandatory ranges to advisory tools for judges. Some contend that the guidelines disproportionately punish some crimes relative to others.
Other People Are Reading
-
What are the federal sentencing guidelines?
-
Starting in the 1960s, the U.S. Sentencing Commission began drafting guidelines on the appropriate prison sentence for various crimes. Among the goals was to provide uniformity in punishment for the same crime in order to minimize the variation from one judge to another.
Why are the guidelines only advisory and not compulsory?
-
In 2005, the U.S. Supreme Court, in U.S. v. Booker, found that requiring judges to use the sentencing guidelines violated the 6th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Thereafter, the guidelines have been viewed as simply advisory, though many judges continue to give them significant weight.
-
Allegations of unjust results
-
Some have contended that the punishments listed in the federal sentencing guidelines unfairly target poor and minority criminals for harsher jail time. For example, the sentence for possession of crack cocaine has been longer than for a similar amount of powder cocaine. Some advocates contend that this only serves to punish the poor (who are more likely to use crack than pure cocaine).
What do the guidelines consider?
-
The guidelines are tables that consider the crime that has been committed and the criminal's history of prior criminal activity.
Comparison to state guidelines and three strikes laws
-
Several states have adopted sentencing guidelines that are similar to the federal guidelines. The logic of U.S. v. Booker should apply to these guidelines in much the same way as it does the federal guidelines. Consequently, they, generally speaking, should be considered advisory and not compulsory in most cases. Similarly, mandatory sentences under "three strikes" laws may be limited for the same reason. For example, the California three strikes law allows a judge to ignore prior convictions in the interest of justice.
-
