Pros And Cons Of Mandatory Sentencing

Words: 431
Pages: 2

Structured criminal sentencing is a method of determining how an offender will be sentenced. It equips judges with the appropriate tools when imposing a sentence specified by law. Over the past 100 years, sentencing models have varied due to offender populations and correctional philosophy. These models have shifted from the judicial model of sentencing to administrative. In the past 30 years, enormous changes in the philosophy and practice of sentencing and corrections have occurred. The strong emphasis on rehabilitation that existed for the first seven decades of the 20th century gave way in the 1970's to a focus on fairness and justice. It later moved to a crime-control model that emphasized incarceration as a way to reduce crime in the …show more content…
Determinate sentencing is based on the incapacitation and deterrence goals of sentencing. The theory behind determinate sentencing is that criminals will be off the streets for longer periods of time. The next form method is mandatory sentencing. Mandatory sentencing implements the tough-on-crime policies. It removes the sentencing options from judges. Mandatory sentencing is implemented for crimes such as drunk driving, committing a crime with a dangerous weapon, and selling drugs. It requires the offender to serve a fixed amount of time incarcerated before being eligible for release with the approval of the parole board. The last model consists of guidelines sentencing. By 1998, seventeen states and the federal government had adopted sentencing for guidelines. These guidelines shifted sentencing power from state judges to legislators. They consisted of voluntary/advisory guideline sentencing and presumptive guideline sentencing. They both use indeterminate or determinate sentencing structures. However, a presumptive guideline sentencing exists in many states by statute. It specifies an appropriate sentence for each offense to be executed as a baseline for a judge when handing out