Conscientious Acquittal — Judges — Galsworthy Criminal Justice Reform Program

Judges

Defendants are regularly condemned to years, decades, or life in prison for minor infractions because of minimum sentencing statutes. If judges had more discretion in sentencing, then sentences could be more proportional to the crime, more specific to the individual defendant, and minimize the negative impact of minimum sentencing laws without inherently needing those laws repealed.

Defending a Court’s Discretion To Allow Arguments for Conscientious Acquittal

“Throughout the entire Anglo-American legal tradition, the independence of citizen juries has been understood to be an indispensable structural check on executive and legislative power. This independence has traditionally implied that jurors would both understand the consequences of a conviction, and that they would possess the power of conscientious acquittal, or “jury nullification”—that is, the inherent prerogative to decline to convict a defendant, even if factual guilt is shown beyond a reasonable doubt, when convicting would work a manifest injustice.“

Cato Institute

December 20, 2018

JudgesPhillip ReevesDecember 20, 2018Cato Institute, Conscientious AcquittalComment

Judges

Galsworthy CJR Program

Info