Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: November 25, 2024 Mon
Time: 9:12 pm
Time: 9:12 pm
Results for mandatory minimum sentences
7 results foundAuthor: Gotsch, Kara Title: Breakthrough in U.S. Drug Sentencing Reform: The Fair Sentencing Act and the Unfinished Reform Agenda Summary: Last year's (2010) passage of the federal Fair Sentencing Act, legislation that reduced the 100-to-1 sentencing disparity for crack cocaine offenses and eliminated the five-year mandatory minimum for simple possession of crack cocaine, reformed a law universally condemned for its harshness and for the racial disparity it produced. The reform is part of a larger movement to reconsider long mandatory minimum sentences for low-level drug offenses that pervade sentencing policy in the United States as well as in Latin America. Passage of the Fair Sentencing Act in August 2010 marked the first time in 40 years that the U.S. Congress eliminated a mandatory sentence. The legislation was historic at a time when intense partisan wrangling over a broad range of issues on Capitol Hill dominated debate and stymied action. Hopefully, the breakthrough represented by the Fair Sentencing Act will contribute to a broader movement to address disproportionate punishment and ensure a fairer justice system. WOLA’s new report by Kara Gotsch, director of advocacy at The Sentencing Project, describes the effort that led to passage of the Fair Sentencing Act and points to the unfinished sentencing reform agenda. The report highlights the importance of the reform beyond U.S. borders and argues that “given the United States’ role as the principal architect and major proponent of a global drug control system that has emphasized ‘zero-tolerance’ and criminal sanctions, the passage of the Fair Sentencing Act is a milestone not only for U.S. policy, but also for reform advocates in other countries.” Details: Washington, DC: Washington Office on Latin America, 2011. Source: Internet Resource: January 31, 2012 at http://sentencingproject.org/doc/dp_WOLA_Article.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://sentencingproject.org/doc/dp_WOLA_Article.pdf Shelf Number: 123914 Keywords: Drug Laws (U.S.)Mandatory Minimum SentencesSentencingSentencing Reform |
Author: United States Sentencing Commission Title: Report to Congress: Mandatory Minimum Penalties in the Federal Criminal Justice System Summary: This report assesses the impact of mandatory minimum penalties on federal sentencing, particularly in light of the Supreme Court's decision in Booker v. United States, which rendered the federal sentencing guidelines advisory. The United States Sentencing Commission prepared this report pursuant to a congressional directive contained in section 4713 of the Matthew Shepherd and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009, Pub L. No. 111–84, and the Commission's general authority under 28 U.S.C. §§ 994–995, as well as its specific authority under 28 U.S.C. § 995(a)(20) to "make recommendations to Congress concerning modification or enactment of statutes relating to sentencing, penal, and correctional matters that the Commission finds to be necessary and advisable to carry out an effective, humane, and rational sentencing policy." Details: Washington, DC: The Sentencing Commission, 2011. 369p., app. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed February 1, 2012 at: http://www.ussc.gov/Legislative_and_Public_Affairs/Congressional_Testimony_and_Reports/Mandatory_Minimum_Penalties/20111031_RtC_Mandatory_Minimum.cfm Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.ussc.gov/Legislative_and_Public_Affairs/Congressional_Testimony_and_Reports/Mandatory_Minimum_Penalties/20111031_RtC_Mandatory_Minimum.cfm Shelf Number: 123919 Keywords: Booker v. United StatesMandatory Minimum SentencesPunishmentSentencing |
Author: Iowa Public Safety Advisory Board Title: Final Report: Outcomes of Mandatory Minimum Sentences for Drug Traffickers Summary: A mandatory minimum sentence requires that offenders serve a certain portion of their sentence in confinement, without the possibility of parole, until they have served the required portion of time. Mandatory minimum sentencing became popular in the 1980s and 1990s as a proposed way to control crime and create equity in sentencing. However, a growing body of research indicates that mandatory sentencing is ineffective and has not reduced recidivism rates or gender, age, and race disparities. In addition, exceptions in the law allow for reductions in mandatory sentencing if offenders provide helpful information to authorities, typically benefiting high risk offenders and resulting in a higher incarceration of low risk offenders. This study was undertaken to assess the effectiveness of mandatory minimum sentences for drug traffickers. In Iowa, the drug offender mandatory minimum is required by Code of Iowa §124.413 and requires offenders to serve at least one-third of the maximum sentence of their offense class. Code of Iowa §901.10 allows for reductions in the mandatory minimum sentence. The cohort studied here included drug traffickers who entered prison as new admissions or probation violators and who were released from prison or work release in FY2007. Those who served mandatory sentences were compared to those whose mandatory sentences were waived (eligible but not serving a mandatory sentence). The total in the study cohort was 625. The outcome of interest in the study was recidivism, defined as a return-to-prison within three years. Outcomes for all cohort members were examined excluding foreign born offenders who may not have had an opportunity to recidivate due to deportation or federal incarceration. The major findings are summarized below. Detailed data and other findings are provided in the outcomes section. Details: Des Moines: Iowa Department of Human Rights, Division of Criminal and Juvenile Justice Planning, 2011. 50p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed May 2, 2012 at: http://www.humanrights.iowa.gov/cjjp/images/pdf/PSAB_MandatoryMinimumReport2011.pdf Year: 2011 Country: United States URL: http://www.humanrights.iowa.gov/cjjp/images/pdf/PSAB_MandatoryMinimumReport2011.pdf Shelf Number: 125125 Keywords: Drug OffendersDrug TraffickersMandatory Minimum SentencesSentencing (Iowa) |
Author: Pivot Legal Society Title: Throwing Away the Keys: The human and social cost of mandatory minimum sentences Summary: Crime rates in Canada are at their lowest point since 1972, yet last year Canada’s federal government introduced sweeping legislative reforms to our criminal justice system. The stated goal of these expansive and expensive measures is to increase the safety and security of Canadians by getting “tough on crime” and holding offenders accountable. The Safe Streets and Communities Act (SSCA), alternately known as Bill C-10 and the “Omnibus Crime Bill,” was passed by Parliament on March 12, 2012. When the SSCA was debated in Parliament, Canadians were told that many provisions of the Act, including the introduction of mandatory minimum sentences for a number of drug offences, would target “serious organized drug crime” rather than people struggling with drug dependence. Many well-respected commentators, including the Canadian Bar Association, the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, and the Assembly of First Nations have argued, however, that these amendments will affect a spectrum of drug offenders, including people involved in the sale and/or production of illicit substances as a result of their struggle with drug dependence. Pivot Legal Society undertook this research in order to assess the potential scope and nature of the effects of the Safe Streets and Communities Act on low-income drug users. We also sought to examine whether new criminal law provisions were likely to raise constitutional issues, particularly when applied to members of Charter-protected groups, such as Aboriginal people and people with disabilities (including drug dependence). Our conclusion is that several provisions of the SSCA, including mandatory minimum sentences for certain drug offences, are unlikely to achieve their stated goals of deterrence and disruption of organized crime. Our findings also suggest that these “tough on crime” measures will be costly, both economically and socially, and will have disproportionate negative effects for people living with drug dependence, Aboriginal people, and youth in or leaving the foster care system. Finally, we make the argument that the application of a number of provisions of the SSCA may result in violations of the Charter rights of low-income drug users and other protected groups and may therefore be vulnerable to constitutional challenge. Details: Vancouver, BC: Pivot Legal Society, 2013. 52p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed August 5, 2013 at: http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/pivotlegal/pages/395/attachments/original/1372448744/Final_ThrowingAway_lo-res_-_v2.pdf?1372448744 Year: 2013 Country: Canada URL: http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/pivotlegal/pages/395/attachments/original/1372448744/Final_ThrowingAway_lo-res_-_v2.pdf?1372448744 Shelf Number: 129530 Keywords: Mandatory Minimum SentencesPunishmentSentencing (Canada) |
Author: Subramanian, Ram Title: Playbook for Change? States Reconsider Mandatory Sentences Summary: Since 2000, at least 29 states have taken steps to roll back mandatory sentences, with 32 bills passed in just the last five years. Most legislative activity has focused on adjusting penalties for nonviolent drug offenses through the use of one or a combination of the following reform approaches: 1) expanding judicial discretion through the creation of so-called "safety value" provisions, 2) limiting automatic sentence enhancements, and 3) repealing or revising mandatory minimum sentences. In this policy report, Vera's Center on Sentencing and Corrections summarizes state-level mandatory sentencing reforms since 2000, raises questions about their impact, and offers recommendations to jurisdictions considering similar efforts Details: New York: Vera Institute of Justice, 2014. 28p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed April 19, 2014 at: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/mandatory-sentences-policy-report-v2b.pdf Year: 2014 Country: United States URL: http://www.vera.org/sites/default/files/resources/downloads/mandatory-sentences-policy-report-v2b.pdf Shelf Number: 132066 Keywords: Drug OffendersMandatory Minimum SentencesPunishmentSentencingSentencing Reform |
Author: United States Sentencing Commission Title: Mandatory Minimum Penalties for Firearms Offenses in the Federal Criminal Justice System Summary: This publication is the third in the Commission's series on mandatory minimum penalties. Using fiscal year 2016 data, this publication includes analyses of the two statutes carrying a firearms mandatory minimum penalty, 18 U.S.C. 924(c) (relating to using or possessing firearms in furtherance of drug trafficking or crimes of violence) and the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. 924(e), as well as the impact of those provisions on the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) population. Where appropriate, the publication highlights changes and trends since the Commission's 2011 Mandatory Minimum Report. Details: Washington, DC: The Commission, 2018. 81p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed July 10, 2018 at: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2018/20180315_Firearms-Mand-Min.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2018/20180315_Firearms-Mand-Min.pdf Shelf Number: 150793 Keywords: Drug TraffickingFederal Sentencing GuidelinesFirearms OffensesMandatory Minimum SentencesSentencing GuidelinesViolent Crime |
Author: United States Sentencing Commission Title: Mandatory Minimum Penalties for Identity Theft Offenses in the Federal Criminal Justice System Summary: This publication is the fifth in the Commission's series on mandatory minimum penalties. In 2017, the Commission published its Overview of Mandatory Minimum Penalties in the Federal Criminal Justice System (2017 Overview Publication) and subsequently issued three publications providing detailed analyses of the application of mandatory minimum penalties to specific offense types- drugs in October 2017; firearms in March 2018; and the use of recidivist enhancements for drug traffickers under 21 U.S.C. SS 851 in July 2018. These publications build on the Commission's 2011 Report to the Congress: Mandatory Minimum Penalties in the Federal Criminal Justice System (2011 Mandatory Minimum Report), which provided detailed historical analyses of the evolution of federal mandatory minimum penalties, scientific literature on the topic, and extensive analysis of the Commission's own data, public comment, and expert testimony. These publications highlight recent trends in the charging of offenses carrying mandatory minimum penalties and provide updated sentencing data demonstrating the impact of those penalties. This publication focuses on the application of mandatory minimum penalties specific to identity theft offenses. As used in this publication, the term "identity theft offenses" refers to the offenses established at 18 U.S.C. 1028 (general identity theft) and 18 U.S.C. 1028A (aggravated identity theft), as well as any other offense sentenced under the fraud guideline, 2B1.1, that received the 2-level enhancement for identity theft conduct. Only the aggravated identity theft statute, 18 U.S.C. 1028A, carries a mandatory minimum penalty. Other identity theft offenses do not carry a mandatory minimum penalty. Identity theft offenses represent a small portion of the federal caseload, and section 1028A cases represent a small portion of all cases involving a mandatory minimum penalty. However, section 1028A convictions have increased both as a number and as a percentage of cases involving a mandatory minimum penalty since the Commission began collecting data on these offenses. Using fiscal year 2016 data, this publication includes analyses of 18 U.S.C. 1028A, which provides for a two-year mandatory minimum penalty, as compared to identity theft offenses that do not carry mandatory minimum penalties, as well as the impact of these offenses on the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) population. Where appropriate, the publication highlights changes and trends since the Commission's 2011 Mandatory Minimum Report. Details: Washington, DC: The Commission, 2018. 56p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed March 8, 2019 at: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2018/20180924_ID-Theft-Mand-Min.pdf Year: 2018 Country: United States URL: https://www.ussc.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/research-and-publications/research-publications/2018/20180924_ID-Theft-Mand-Min.pdf Shelf Number: 154846 Keywords: Federal Sentencing Guidelines Identity Theft Mandatory Minimum Penalties Mandatory Minimum SentencesSentencing |