What is the difference between mandatory and discretionary sentencing?

Mandatory and discretionary sentencing refer to laws that require judges to sentence convicted criminals in a certain way. In California, mandatory sentencing requires judges to impose a minimum sentence for certain offenses. This means that even if the judge believes that a shorter sentence would be appropriate, they must still impose the mandatory minimum sentence. This can be used to impose harsher penalties on repeat offenders or to prevent judges from showing leniency. Discretionary sentencing allows judges to make decisions based on the individual circumstances of the case. This means that judges can look at mitigating and aggravating factors to decide what they think is the most appropriate sentence. For instance, a judge may take into consideration an offender’s history and remorse in determining the sentence. Discretionary sentencing allows a measure of flexibility in sentencing that is not available with mandatory sentencing laws. Overall, mandatory sentencing laws limit judges’ discretion by forcing them to impose certain sentences. On the other hand, discretionary sentencing allows judges to evaluate the individual circumstances of the case and make decisions based on the particular situation of the offender.

Related FAQs

What are the rules of the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments in criminal cases?
What is the difference between a direct and an indirect appeal?
What is the purpose of a criminal jury?
What is the difference between a misdemeanor and a felony?
What is habeas corpus in criminal procedure?
What is the difference between direct and circumstantial evidence?
What is the purpose of a motion to suppress evidence in criminal cases?
What is the process of a criminal trial?
What is the exclusionary rule of the Fourth Amendment?
What is the process of a trial by jury in criminal cases?

What is the difference between mandatory and discretionary sentencing?

Related FAQs

Related Blog Posts