DATE DOWNLOADED: Sun Nov 22 11:11:23 2020

SOURCE: Content Downloaded from HeinOnline

Citations:

Bluebook 21st ed.

William W. Wilkins Jr., Mandatory Sentences, 5 FED. Sent'g REP. 201 (1993).

ALWD 6th ed.

Wilkins, W. ., Mandatory sentences, 5(4) Fed. Sent'g Rep. 201 (1993).

APA 7th ed.

Wilkins, W. (1993). Mandatory sentences. Federal Sentencing Reporter, 5(4), 201-201.

Chicago 7th ed.

William W. Wilkins Jr., "Mandatory Sentences," Federal Sentencing Reporter 5, no. 4
(January/February 1993): 201-201

McGill Guide 9th ed.

William W Wilkins Jr, "Mandatory Sentences" (1993) 5:4 Federal Sentencing Reporter
201.

MLA 8th ed.

Wilkins, William W. Jr. "Mandatory Sentences." Federal Sentencing Reporter, vol. 5,
no. 4, January/February 1993, p. 201-201. HeinOnline.

OSCOLA 4th ed.

William W Wilkins Jr, 'Mandatory Sentences' (1993) 5 Fed Sent'g Rep 201

-- Your use of this HeinOnline PDF indicates your acceptance of HeinOnline's Terms and
Conditions of the license agreement available at
https://heinonline.org/HOL/License
-- The search text of this PDF is generated from uncorrected OCR text.
-- To obtain permission to use this article beyond the scope of your license, please use:
Copyright Information
Federal Sentencing Reporter: Vol. 5, No. 4, January / February 1993 201

MANDATORY MINIMUM PENALTIES

MANDATORY SENTENCES opposing mandatory minimum statutes. We

have encouraged Congress to resist promulga-
William W. Wilkins, Jr.* tion of any additional mandatory minimum
statutes. And, we have asked Congress to give
serious consideration to abolishing those
Hold the course on the sentencing guidelines already in the federal criminal code in favor of a
and change the course on mandatory minimum guideline sentencing system unrestricted by
statutes. these types of statutes.
The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 autho- The'bottom line is that if mandatory mini-
rized the creation of the Sentencing Commis- mum sentencing statutes were ever needed, this
sion, an independent agency in the judicial new guideline sentencing system has rendered
branch charged with the responsibility of them obsolete.
promulgating sentencing guidelines for use in One positive step to effectuate these ends
the federal courts. However, before the Sen- was taken late in the 102nd Congress by the
tencing Commission had promulgated its first introduction of legislation that would abolish all
guideline, Congress enacted a series of manda- mandatory minimum statutes in favor of
tory sentences for drug and firearms offenses. guideline sentences. I urge the judiciary to
Thus, when the guidelines went into effect on voice its support for similar legislation if
November 1, 1987, they operated subservient to introduced in the new Congress.
these mandatory minimum sentencing statutes.
I suggest that new mandatory sentencing
statutes should not be enacted and serious
consideration should be given to repealing
many of those presently on the books.
Independent research by the Commission,
the General Accounting Office, and others have
documented a significant reduction in unwar-
ranted sentencing disparity during the past five
years. This major improvement in our criminal
justice system is directly attributable to federal
judges applying the sentencing guidelines on a
nationwide basis. On balance, these guidelines
have produced a fairer system by ensuring
certainty of punishment and consistency of
treatment for similar offenders convicted of like
offenses.
In my view, most of the problems alleged to
stem from the guidelines canmore properly be
traced to mandatory minimum statutes. The
sentences these statutes mandate are philo-
sophically at odds with the notion of guideline
sentencing and have the tendency to skew
punishment levels by sometimes producing
unwarranted uniformity. On the other hand,
they often apply on a hit or miss basis, depend-
ing on how prosecutorial charging discretion is
exercised. The Commission is on record

* Chairman, United States Sentencing Commission;

Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth
Circuit.