Comparing The Civil Law System And Flexible Sentencing

Throughout history, two primary legal systems have coexisted globally: the civil law system and the common law system (Diffen). The civil law system is characterized by adherence to statutory laws and legal codes that prescribe specific penalties for various offenses, thereby limiting judges' discretion in sentencing. In contrast, the common law system empowers judges to consider prior case judgments and legal precedents when determining sentences. This approach allows for a more flexible sentencing process that takes into account the unique circumstances of each case and the broader societal context, with a focus on ensuring fairness and justice in individual instances. As has been defined by many criminal laws from different jurisdictions,

To be more specific, nowadays criminal law cases are more and more complex. There are various types of charges and offenses, like drug crimes, white-collar crimes, and cybercrimes, etc. Due to this complexity, most of the punishments recommended in fixed sentencing guidelines do not serve the purpose of the U.S. Code. For instance, Derrick Kimbrough was accused of producing and selling cocaine (Yeh and Doyle). Generally, the judge is required to impose a minimum sentence of 228 to 270 months of imprisonment for such crimes, according to the Federal Sentencing Act. However, the judge decided not to strictly adhere to guidelines, because he believed that the range of the recommended sentence is greater than the necessary range to accomplish the purpose of sentencing in 18 U. S. Code 3553(a). Due to this belief, the judge deemed the minimum sentence inappropriate for this type of crime and imposed a lower sentence of 180 months (“Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (2007)”). Moreover, according to U. S. Code 3553(a) (“18 U.S. Code 3553 - Imposition of a Sentence”), the court shall impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary”, which means judges are allowed to make flexible punishment to meet the objective of just and reasonable punishment of

Furthermore, humanitarian sentences also help prisoners rehabilitate to society and avoid reoffending. According to the research, Brown-Long now “spends her days doing community service and mentoring at-risk girls on the importance of boundaries and the real dangers of social media”. So, in this case, it witnessed that flexible sentencing emphasizes rehabilitation and reintegration into society. Besides, since being released from prison early, Brown-Long has apologized in public to the family of the man she killed, which demonstrates that flexible sentencing can offer a more compassionate way to address criminal behavior. In addition, Brown-Long is establishing a non-profit foundation to advocate for legislation for juvenile crimes sentences. Thus, it’s suggested that flexible punishment promotes reintegration into society and repentance, which in turn leads to a peaceful and safe community. Although the advocates of fixed punishments will mention the Boston Marathon bombing case and the Oklahoma City bombing case, these cases are very rare serious, vicious