NCJ Number
85554
Date Published
Unknown
Length
10 pages
Annotation
The mandatory sentencing proposal under consideration by District of Columbia voters is unfair to the individual, ineffective in reducing crime, and expensive.
Abstract
The proposal would impose a mandatory minimum sentences of 5 years on persons convicted of committing a violent crime while in possession of a firearm and up to 4 years for the sale, distribution, and manufacture of drugs. It prohibits the parole or suspension of those sentences under any circumstances. Mandatory minimum sentences are unwise because they eliminate the judge's ability to fit the punishment to the crime. They are unlikely to stem the crime rate in a district where over 75 percent of all reported offenses never result in an arrest and over 95 percent never lead to a conviction. Increased incarceration of offenders will not protect citizens from crime. Such sentences will unwisely replace judicial discretion with unchecked prosecutorial discretion. Moreover, under mandatory sentencing schemes, trial costs escalate, the prison population swells, and construction of new prisons is often required. These proposals also divert energy and resources away from the development of more viable alternatives, such as sentencing guidelines legislation. A few references are cited in the text.