The following discussion comes from your week 7 readings. Outside research to address these issues is encouraged. I would suggest using the online library for additional sources of information and research. In addition, I would recommend utilizing the legal studies program guide.
After a defendant is found guilty there is the sentencing and appeal phase of the process. Most attorneys will file an appeal on behalf of the defendant if there is an appealable issue. Sometimes the judge is granted a lot of discussion in determining a defendant’s sentence. Other times, the judge’s hands are tied based on the mandatory minimum sentencing laws.
This forum asks you to examine the sentencing and appeal phase of the criminal process.
Please thoroughly discuss each of the following:
- Are judges given too much discretion when it comes to sentencing? What are some of the factors a judge looks at when determining an appropriate sentence? Do you believe the time fit the crime or should the time fit the offender? Discuss some of the different types of a sentence a judge may order.
- What is the difference between a determinate and indeterminate sentence? Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of each.
- Do you think mandatory minimum sentences serve any real purpose? Do these types of sentences deter offenders?
Based on the facts provided to you in week 1 discussion forum #2, the investigation report, the confession by Mayo and the witness statements made by Dietz and Joe answer the following:
1) Assuming Mayo is found guilty at trial, what would you recommend as an appropriate sentence for Mayo? Please answer this question from both positions of being the prosecutor and the defense attorney representing Mayo. Discuss why and make sure to support your thoughts.
2) Would there be a mandatory-minimum sentence at issue in this case? Discuss why.
3) Are there any appealable issue for Mayo’s attorney to file?