Definition
Mandatory minimum sentences definitively refer to a minimum term or period of imprisonment or sentencing to an individual convicted for a particular crime. On the other hand, sentencing guidelines refer to the standards for ascertaining the punishment that a convicted individual should receive for a specific crime based on its nature and the individual’s criminal history.
Purpose
In essence, the mandatory minimum sentences were implemented through the Sentencing Act of 1984 to address the need to curb or set boundaries for the unlimited or unrestrained sentencing discretion by federal trial judges and courts that resulted in sentencing disparities in factually similar cases, (Larkin Jr & Bernick, 2014). The mandatory sentences further served to eliminate the court’s discretion and promote leniency. Concurrently, the sentencing guidelines were promulgated as a means of regulating and channeling the remaining discretion or autonomy by judges and courts. Even though the original intended purpose of the guidelines by the 1984 act was to control, this purpose was overhauled by the United States v. Booker case of 2005 (Bogan, 2012). Thus, the guidelines in the current law practice are advisory rather than mandatory.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Opinion
In my opinion, mandatory minimum sentences hinder or inhibit judicial efficiency. In essence, it is not by coincidence that proliferation in the prison population followed the introduction of the mandatory minimum sentences. As such, several lawmakers and concerned stakeholders have expressed their concern regarding the sentences. Other than the increased prison population, by removing judicial discretion in proffering sentences below the statutory minimum, the mandatory minimum sentences have resulted in disproportionate and unjust punishment –a vice they were set up to eradicate in the first place. In other words, the mandatory minimum sentences have created sentencing disparities by treating similar offenders differently and different offenders similar. Corroborating these sentiments is Luna (2017) who ascertains that the rigid nature of the minimums encourage system manipulation and deceit because the power has been taken away from the judges and handed over to prosecutors who may coerce defendants or make a deal with them to plead guilty.
References
Bogan, B., W. (2012). An introduction to federal sentencing . Office of the Federal Public Defender. Western District of Texas. https://txw.fd.org/sites/txw.fd.org/files/Introduction%20to%20Federal%20Sentencing%2014%20Final.pdf
Larkin, P., & Bernick, E. (2014). Reconsidering mandatory minimum sentences: The arguments for and against potential reforms. The Heritage Foundation , 114. Retrieved from http://thf_media.s3.amazonaws.com/2014/pdf/LM114.pdf
Luna, E. (2017). Mandatory Minimums. Reforming criminal justice: A report of the Academy for Justice on bridging the gap between scholarship and reform , 4 , 117-146. Retrieved from http://academyforjustice.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/7_Criminal_Justice_Reform_Vol_4_Mandatory-Minimums.pdf
