Federal sentencing from 2008-2012 for Arizona

Published: 2019-07-17 14:15:17
543 words
2 pages
5 min to read
letter-mark
B
letter
University/College: 
Type of paper: 
This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

Crime rates in Arizona have experienced a decreasing trend over the last decade and as such the federal sentences have also reduced. Between 2009 and 2009, the concentration of federal sentences for violent offenders has increased by 5.3% while that of the non-violent offenders has decreased by 5.25% both as a percentage of the confined population. Violent offenders constitute over 95% while the nonviolent offenders make the rest 5%.Recent statistics as of 2012 show that federal sentences in Arizona have decreased by 4% over 2009 estimates. Though Arizona has seen a decreasing trend in national crimes rates for the last decade, the greatest percentage of the population say that the federal sentences are not fair and just.

Federal sentencing from 2008-2012 for Alabama

Federal sentencing in Alabama is based on a list of set guidelines in accordance to the law. Alabamas criminal sentencing is set to standards that uphold the safety of the society and recognizes the effect of crime on victims by concentrating on the confinement of violent, sex, and repeat offenders. Courts in Alabama have maintained a meaningful judicial discretion and as such allowing judges the flexibility to personalize sentences based on the distinct circumstances of each case. Alabama is divided into three sub-regions i.e. the middle, northern and the southern region. A total of 1068 offenders between 2008 and 2012 pleaded guilty to their offenses and out of this 1030 were sentenced while the rest 38 underwent trials.

Federal sentencing from 2008-2012 for New York

Federal sentencing in New York has a significant difference in the manner in which a defendant is sentenced as compared to other states. Unlike other states where the prosecutors can offer a specific sentence e.g. two or three years on probation, federal prosecutors in New York do not have the same the authority. Instead, there is no surety an offender will receive a pre-agreed upon sentence upon a plea of guilty to a certain federal crime. Between 2008 and 2012, the total number of federal sentencing in New York was 4192, with 95.6% of the offenders pleading guilty while 184 of them that is 4.4% plead facing trials.

Federal sentencing from 2008-2012 for Wisconsin

Research outcomes conducted between 2008 and 2012 prove that the highest court in Wisconsin is violating the rights of a huge number of criminal defendants by using certain software tool that assesses whether the defendant is at risk to the society or not. The assessment based on software eliminates the need for judges and correction officers to rely on manual assessment procedures, which at most times are usually discretionary and subjective to assess the risk. During the four-year duration, 350 offenders in Eastern Wisconsin plead guilty to their mistakes where 341 of them were sentenced, and the rest 9 faced trials.

During the duration between 2008 and 2012, it is important to note that a huge part of the population in the states discussed above complained that the federal judges sentences were lenient varying too much from one location to another. As such, the United States government had to set standards/guidelines that specify sentences for almost all federal crimes ranging from drug possessions to murder. Moreover, the federal court judges have considerable sentencing discretion, and appellate court judges cannot overturn trial judges sentences for an abuse of the discretion as done in earlier years.

Reference

United States Sentencing Commission.(2005). United States Sentencing Commission Guidelines Manual.Government Printing Office.

sheldon

Request Removal

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the SpeedyPaper website, please click below to request its removal: