Pros And Cons Of Mandatory Sentencing

Keeping in mind the brief overview of each of the major rationales for sentencing will allow the following four arguments to be understood with greater clarity. To begin, the first argument to support the urgent need to restructure the criminal justice system is the effect and impact of mandatory minimum sentencing on the high rates of incarcerations. The effects of mandatory minimum sentencing are staggering, and transcend into many different areas of the criminal justice system. The principal justification for the creation of mandatory minimum sentences is that by increasing the likelihood of custody, it will be a strict deterrent for crime prevention and a response to political “tough on crime” strategies. It was also thought to minimize
This is one of the major effects of mandatory minimum sentencing in that it limits judicial discretion of the most serious crimes in the criminal justice system. What is problematic in this instance is that without variation the role of judges, their highly respected reasoning in balancing competing values, and understanding of the law is compromised because of these restrictions in sentencing. Has this discretion completely vanished? Athar Malik explains that as a result, “what little discretion remains in the hands of the judge, now gives the Crown an inordinate amount of power.” Mandatory minimum sentencing may also increase the pressure to plead guilty, whereby the discretion wielded by the Crown is “hidden from public view” which in turn may reduce accountability and allow systemic discrimination to be perpetuated. Hence, mandatory minimums distort the role of the prosecutor, turning him from an advocate into a quasi-judge and this is neither desirable nor appropriate in our judicial system. This is problematic as this limits taking into account varying aggravating and mitigating factors unique to each case. Consequently, with the imposition of mandatory minimum sentencing, judges have become accustomed to imposing prison terms as the norm and with the passage of time there will be fewer judges who will adopt a
Falsely confessing to a guilty plea is another way in which wrongful convictions may be mete out. However, if a person is truly innocent, what would be so strong so as to compel them to plead guilty? One logical answer is that when the potential to be convicted of a crime exists and carries a mandatory sentence with it, it may be better to plead to a lesser crime, which may carry a lower sentence and allow for a conditional sentence. Stat on number of wrongful convictions. Even a single wrongful conviction is a travesty and injustice to the