According to the California Penal Code, sentences for criminal convictions should be proportionate to the seriousness of the crime and should be uniform. Therefore, the state legislature sets punishments based on the crime. California has had mandatory sentencing requirements since 1977, when it moved from indeterminate sentencing to mandatory minimum sentences.
Even though California has mandatory sentencing requirements, judges have some discretion when imposing a criminal sentence. Therefore, it is important to understand the state’s laws regarding mandatory sentencing requirements and the factors that could result in a deviation from mandatory sentences.
What Are California’s Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Criminal Offenses?
California’s mandatory sentencing requirements state that a defendant must serve a minimum amount of time in prison for a conviction. The minimum sentence is required regardless of the circumstances involved in the case or if the person is a first-time offender with a clean criminal history. Judges have very little discretion in most situations. They are not permitted to decrease the minimum sentence even when mitigating circumstances exist.
Why Would California Enact Mandatory Minimum Sentences?
Proponents of mandatory sentencing requirements argue that imposing minimum sentences for crimes can deter people from committing the crime. For example, imposing a minimum prison sentence for a crime may make someone fearful of spending that much time in prison if they are convicted. Regardless of their prior record or other circumstances, they know the court will give them a specific amount of prison time for a conviction.
Mandatory minimums also ensure that someone will serve time in prison if they are convicted of a crime. A defendant cannot use mitigating factors or other arguments to prison. It is a guarantee that if they are convicted of the crime, they are going to prison.
However, mandatory sentencing has had adverse effects too. Adverse effects of mandatory sentencing requirements include:
- Taxpayer money spent on putting people in jail by creating a cycle of imprisonment instead of rehabilitation
- Increased caseload for courts and judges, resulting in delays in the judicial process
- Limiting the power of judges to grant probation when justice is better served through rehabilitation than incarceration
- Limits the use of substance abuse treatment, counseling, and other rehabilitative programs
- Extended prison sentences prevent defendants from providing for their families
Mandatory sentencing requirements can result in a felony crime being punished by a minimum term in jail all the way up to life in prison. The judge determines the penalty within the given range based on the factors in the case. Yet, if the crime has a mandatory minimum sentence, the defendant will likely serve at least that much time in prison.
How Does Mandatory Sentencing Work in California?
When you commit a felony crime with mandatory sentencing requirements, the judge must consider the possible sentencing terms. Most felonies have three possible sentencing terms:
- Lower Term – the minimum sentence for a crime, such as three years for kidnapping
- Middle Term – The mid-range term for a crime, such as five years for kidnapping
- Higher Term – The maximum sentence for a crime, such as eight years for kidnapping
Judges consider aggravating and mitigating factors when deciding whether to use a lower, middle, or higher term for sentencing. Aggravating factors include, but are not limited to:
- Causing great bodily injury when committing a crime
- Having a minor involved in the crime
- The victim is particularly vulnerable, such as a mentally ill or elderly victim
- Using a deadly weapon in the commission of the crime
- Having prior criminal convictions
- Including others in the crime or being in a leadership role in committing the crime
- Witness tampering or interfering with the judicial process
Generally, the severity of the punishment increases as the number of aggravating factors increases.
On the other hand, mitigating factors can lessen a sentence. Examples of mitigating factors include, but are not limited to:
- You played a minor role in committing the crime
- You made restitution to the victim
- You believed you owned the property you took
- The victim was an initiator of the force or violent offense
- You were suffering from a mental illness
A judge may impose a less severe sentence when a mitigating factor is involved. As the number of mitigating factors increases, the severity of the punishment decreases.
Are Misdemeanor Crimes Subject to Mandatory Minimum Sentences?
Misdemeanors are considered less serious crimes than felonies. Examples of misdemeanor crimes include simple assault, driving under the influence (DUI), disorderly conduct, and probation violation.
The maximum sentence for a misdemeanor conviction is one year in county jail. Therefore, misdemeanor charges are not subject to the mandatory sentencing requirements. However, some criminal statutes may set a minimum time in county jail for specific misdemeanor charges involving aggravating factors.
Some Criminal Offenses Do Not Have Mandatory Minimum Requirements for Sentencing
California stopped using mandatory minimum sentences for non-violent drug offenses as of January 2021. Judges may not reconsider criminal sentences for non-violent drug offenses once the person has served a minimum of 15 years in prison.
Additionally, judges may reconsider criminal sentences for all non-violent crimes once the person has been in prison for 15 years. Non-violent crimes that do not have mandatory sentencing requirements include some offenses related to fraud, drug crimes, pornography-related crimes, and gun crimes.
Contact Our Criminal Defense Law Firm in San Jose, CA
Mandatory sentencing requirements can result in harsh sentences and prison terms. Contact Ahmed & Sukaram Criminal Defense Attorneys today at (408) 217-8818 to schedule a free consultation with a San Jose criminal defense lawyer. We help you fight criminal charges to protect your rights.