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individual defendant, and minimize the negative impact of minimum sentencing laws without inherently needing those laws repealed.
"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"Critics object that the use of “acquitted conduct” to justify longer sentences empowers prosecutors and judges to ignore the judgment of the jury, to base sentences on facts rebuffed by the citizens in the jury box. Those critics include one of Bell’s jurors and Court of Appeals Judge Brett Kavanaugh, the current nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court."
The Marshall Project
July 23, 2018
Read More"The Jennings Court overturned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit’s requirement that individuals subject to mandatory detention provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act be provided with initial and then periodic bond hearings ascertaining the appropriateness of continued detention with the possibility of release pending judicial proceedings. The Court’s decision in the case leaves open the question of whether the United States can subject the thousands of individuals awaiting a final judicial decision on their applications for immigration relief to prolonged civil detention."
The Regulatory Review
July 23, 2018
Read More"Overall, replacing Kennedy with Kavanaugh will only mean fewer legal protections for people ensnared in the criminal justice system. It’s unlikely that Kavanaugh would ever provide the decisive fifth vote for a criminal defendant or victim of police brutality."
The Appeal
July 13, 2018
Read More"More than 6,700 civil and criminal cases have been restricted from public access since 2013, usually by judges who agreed to a request from prosecutors or defense lawyers to shield them, The Post found. Of those, 3,076 are still under suppression orders that keep the details away from the public — 345 are felony criminal cases — as they work their way through the legal system, according to state computer records."
Denver Post
July 12, 2018
Read More"Until this most recent law was signed, judges were required to release people charged with many misdemeanors without cash bail. But that lack of judicial discretion raised concerns for police, prosecutors and, ultimately, the Legislature. It passed a new law, which Governor Bill Walker signed June 14 that said judges again can decide whether to require cash bail."
Alaska Public Media
July 4, 2018
Read More"A closely-divided Supreme Court recently ruled, in Currier v. Virginia, that when a criminal defendant agrees with the government to adjudicate multiple charges through multiple trials, he cannot, when the first trial ends, reverse course and say that the U.S. Constitution allows only one trial."
Western Journal
July 3, 2018
Read More"Algorithms that make predictions about future behavior based on factors such as a person’s age and criminal history are increasingly used—and increasingly controversial—in criminal justice decision-making. One of the big objections to the use of such algorithms is that they sometimes operate out of the public’s view."
Slate
July 3, 2018
Read More"Mass incarceration is not just about unnecessarily incarcerating masses of people. It is about unnecessarily keeping masses of people in prison for decades. A sentence once imposed is not thereby automatically rendered, just, fair and appropriate in perpetuity. Ultimately, second-look mechanisms are meant to recognize and value the possibility of change and transformation, and to intervene when drastically long sentences are indefensible."
Gotham Gazette
June 26, 2018
Read More"'I can’t tell a defendant you are not getting a jury trial because we’re out of money,' Worton said."
The Columbus Republic
June 16, 2018
Read More"The study found that Republican-appointed judges sentence black defendants three months longer than they do for non-blacks, and female defendants two months less than males, who committed similar offenses, compared to Democratic-appointed judges."
The Crime Report
May 31, 2018
Read More"A New York City man walked free for the first time in decades after a federal judge ruled he'd done enough time for his crimes. By Thursday, Alexander Landor had served 25 years in state prison for an attempted murder conviction — and Brooklyn Federal Judge Sterling Johnson refused to mete out more jail time for the 'rehabilitated' man."
New York Daily News
May 24, 2018
Read More"SB 1393, also known as the Fair and Just Sentencing Reform Act, reinstates judicial discretion in applying five-year sentence enhancements for prior serious felonies to cases involving a defendant charged with a serious felony."
Park Labrea News
May 24, 2018
Read More"The California Senate today approved another moderate reform rooted in evidence-based policy and sensible cost-effective approaches to criminal justice. Specifically, Senate Bill 1393, the Fair and Just Sentencing Reform Act, would eliminate automatic penalties that have contributed to the state’s mass incarceration crisis and failed ‘tough on crime’ policies by returning discretion in sentencing of serious felonies to judges."
California State Senate
May 14, 2018
Read More"It certainly appears the goal is to teach judges, all judges, some lessons: if you want to keep your job as a judge, keep an eye on media reports of public sentiment when you are exercising your sworn duty to sentence a defendant in light of the law and the facts."
The Mercury News
May 5, 2018
Read More"Attitudes of Americans toward incarceration have shifted dramatically since a generation of Republicans and Democrats enacted tough-on-crime policies at the state and federal levels in the 1980s and 1990s. Voters now demand more policies that give judges and the justice system more discretion to tailor punishments specifically to individual crimes and cases."
The Hill
February 11, 2018
Read More"Fifteen states (and Puerto Rico) give judges the power to dismiss prosecutions “in the interests of justice,” or, in other words, to declare that, regardless of the strength of the evidence, a dismissal would get us closer to justice than would continued prosecution. Four states (and Guam) have de minimis dismissal provisions, which serve the same ends."
The Appeal
February 8, 2018
Read More“In halls of justice around the world, how can we ensure everyone is treated with dignity and respect? A pioneering judge in New Jersey, Victoria Pratt shares her principles of ‘procedural justice’ -- four simple, thoughtful steps that redefined the everyday business of her courtroom in Newark, changing lives along the way.“
TED Talks
October 2016
Read More"Judicial discretion is necessary to the proper discharge of our Constitutional obligations as a separate – and independent – branch of government. Legislatures simply cannot write laws to address all situations which find their way into court or that develop as a case makes its way through the legal system. Judges are present during proceedings and hear the evidence firsthand. From this vantage point a judge must have some discretion to apply the law to the facts and procedure of the pending dispute."
The National Judicial College
May 21, 2015
Read More