The mandatory minimum sentencing is defined as "a policy requiring a judge to impose a fixed minimal term in prison for individuals convicted of certain crimes, regardless of the individual's role in the crime or other mitigating circumstances", (Levinthal, 2012, p. 130). The standards set within mandatory minimum sentencing consists of the type of drug, the quantity of the drug, and the individual's criminal history. Whereas, the defendant will either serve the full sentence imposed on them or 85% of the sentence, depending on the jurisdiction, without parole. There are some instances where a judge may reduce a sentence, at the discretion of the prosecutor, when a defendant provides "substantial assistance" against a more significant criminal or assists investigators with an overall investigation (Levinthal, 2012). It is assumed that mandatory …show more content…
This creates an argument for critics, that overcrowding the prisons deters from drug abuse prevention and education, due to limited funding and how the funds are spent (Bethel, 2012). As a result of Blakely v. Washington (2004), the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a trial by jury alone, required facts that are proved by a jury can only be used by a judge, before a sentence can be increased beyond the standard range, and the determination of the sentence by the judge alone, is a violation of the defendant's Sixth Amendment (Blakely v. Washington, n.d.). In the landmark case of Washington v. Booker, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the sentencing guideline would transition from being mandatory to an advisory and the maximum sentence a judge can issue is based upon the facts presented by the defendant or the proof beyond a reasonable doubt must be provided by a jury in the case, United States v. Booker (United States v. Booker,