Judicial discretion

Decent Essays
Improved Essays
Superior Essays
Great Essays
Brilliant Essays
    Page 1 of 34 - About 335 Essays
  • Improved Essays

    laws are set in stone and prevent judges from fitting the punishment to the circumstances of the offense. Mandatory minimum sentences do not by any means override sentencing; they have only shifted that decision from judges to prosecutors. Depending on the offense judges may have to impose whatever punishment the law requires, but prosecutors on the other hand do not have any of the same obligations as a judge. Prosecutors have power over what charges to bring. Even if a prosecutor brings charges against a defendant, the prosecutor is the one who gets to decide whether to ask the district court to reduce a defendant’s sentence. (Clark, 12) Unlimited prosecutorial discretion is a greater evil than unlimited judicial discretion. Prosecutors are not trained at sentencing and are not required to exercise discretion in a fair and honest way. Nowhere else in the criminal justice system does the law give authority to one party to a dispute to decide what should be the appropriate consequence. That decision always rests in the hands of a jury, which must make whatever findings are necessary for a punishment to be imposed, or the judge, who must enter the judgment of conviction that authorizes the correctional system to punish the now-convicted defendant. Mandatory minimum sentences do not reduce crime. As University of Minnesota Law Professor Michael Tonry has concluded, “the weight of the evidence clearly shows that enactment of mandatory penalties has either no demonstrable…

    • 801 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Mandatory Sentences Analysis

    • 2283 Words
    • 10 Pages

    Mandatory minimum sentences emerged in early American history as a proactive way to deter violent and rigorous crimes such as homicides, rape, and treason. Mandatory minimum sentences refer to fixed penalties and laws for offenders who commit particular crimes. These federal laws are set by Congress and do not allow judges to impose a sentence lower than what has been established. These sentences served the purpose of diminishing unlimited judge discretion and consequently lead to the limitation…

    • 2283 Words
    • 10 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Against Mandatory Minimums

    • 1200 Words
    • 5 Pages

    First, mandatory minimums limit judicial discretion and constitute too general a punishment for similar offenses without consideration of the different circumstances surrounding each case. Evan Bernick, Assistant Director of the Center for Judicial Engagement at the Institute for Justice and former Visiting Legal Fellow at the Heritage Foundation, and Paul Larkin, Senior Legal Research Fellow for the Heritage Foundation and former counsel to the Senate Judiciary Committee wrote that “statutes…

    • 1200 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    it highlights the tension between the judicial system and federal government on the topic of mandatory minimums. Scoffield does a superb job of repeating the important facts of the court case and telling the reader why such a case is so significant. In future study I will refer back to this article because it displays an outlier scenario where the judicial system went against federal ruling and got away with it. Criminal Justice and Corrections Policy - Book: Caylor, L., & Beaulne, G. G.…

    • 1876 Words
    • 8 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Ronald Dworkin (born 1932) over whether or not judges has ‘strong’ or ‘weak discretion’ has relevance in this particular issue as its stated by Lord Justice Jacob that ‘conservatives like to insist that their judges are strict constructionists, giving the Constitution and statutes their precise meaning and no more while Liberal judges tend to be expansive about things like equal protection, while conservatives read more into ones like “the right to bear arms.”. Legal positivists, such as H. L.…

    • 713 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Commerce law assessment task 3- Lachlan O’Malley Mandatory Sentencing in New South Wales 1. Mandatory Sentencing- a mandatory sentence is a court decision where legal discretion is limited by law. Most frequently, people convicted of certain crimes such as armed robbery or murder must be punished with at least a minimum number of years set in prison. 2. The introduction of the mandatory sentencing in NSW was the outcome of several brutal crimes. The act is projected to measure alcohol and…

    • 1265 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Superior Essays

    Judicial discretion refers to the powers conferred to a judge in the legal system of a given country to determine the direction of a matter presented to them without the interference of preceding or strict regulations that are established by statutes (Bushway et al. 2012). Judicial discretion is assigned by the legal apparatus within a given jurisdiction, meaning that court decisions may be subject to contest through the utilization of higher powers. Judges are supposed to practice the…

    • 796 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Superior Essays
  • Improved Essays

    In the following the writer indicates what judicial discretion is. What is “judicial discretion is in sentencing?” Judicial discretion gives judges the right to use discretion when sentencing the offender to prison or jail. Over the past decades judicial discretion has waned and more decisions are made by a jury in criminal courts. The fact that most sentencing hearings are now decided by juries gives the offender the chance to fight for themselves. The writer provides statistical data on how…

    • 1115 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Dworkin on Judicial Discretion in “Hard Cases” Lu Zhao Boyu (Bozy) | A0127866R In the standard courtroom, one could reasonably expect the judge to be the one responsible for the holding of a case. However, does and should the judge exercise his own discretion when deciding cases? Prominent legal theorist H. L. A. Hart claims that judges do exercise discretion, especially in “hard cases”, where there is no pre-existing or unambiguous rule. To this matter, Hart’s brilliant student Ronald Dworkin…

    • 910 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    The True Extent of the Supreme Court’s Constitutional Influence Many Americans currently lack a basic fundamental understanding of the Supreme Court’s origins and workings. The Court is a virtually unacknowledged entity. Unlike the executive or legislative branches, most Americans are only exposed to the Court during a greatly publicized issue—such as affirmative action or doctor assisted suicide. The Supreme Court is entrusted with the Constitution’s preservation through the process of…

    • 1734 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Previous
    Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 34