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individual defendant, and minimize the negative impact of minimum sentencing laws without inherently needing those laws repealed.
"One conclusion reached by the NACDL was that "There is ample evidence that federal criminal defendants are being coerced to plead guilty because the penalty for exercising their constitutional rights is simply too high to risk.""
Forbes
July 31, 2018
Read More"The judge who sentenced Turner, T.S. Ellis III, called the punishment 'excessive' and 'wrong' at a June sentencing hearing. If he can’t change the sentence, 'why do we have a judge?' St. Louis asked. 'Let’s put that in his hands . . . but instead you heard the judge say his hands are tied, and that doesn’t seem right to me'."
Washington Post
July 26, 2018
Read More"Jackson, however, does not allow jurors to “speculate” if the evidence was sufficient to support guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. When the prosecutor’s evidence merely invites the jury to speculate on a number of reasonable probabilities — some consistent with guilt, others with innocence — a jury must entertain a reasonable doubt of the defendant’s guilt, the Court said."
Criminal Legal News
July 20, 2018
Read More"In Georgia, except in death penalty cases, are not supposed to know anything about the potential punishment facing the accused. And jurors are also instructed to completely disregard any notions about sentencing during their deliberations."
Atlanta Journal-Constitution
June 8, 2018
Read More