Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: Discretion, the Safety Valve, and the Sentencing Guidelines
![handle is hein.journals/ucinlr63 and id is 1863 raw text is: MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCING: DISCRETION, THE
SAFETY VALVE, AND THE SENTENCING GUIDELINES
Philip Oliss*
I. INTRODUCTION
Traditionally, Congress has limited its sentencing policy to estab-
lishing maximum sentences for federal crimes and has allowed judges
the discretion to impose sentences up to those maximums.' On occa-
sion, however, Congress has legislated mandatory minimums for
specific crimes.' Mandatory minimums are statutory provisions bind-
ing courts to impose specific criminal penalties for certain criminal
conduct.' They are designed to ensure that all defendants convicted of
a specified offense receive at least a minimum predetermined sentence.'
The United States Congress first adopted the mandatory minimum
penalty in 1790 as a weapon against piracy.5 That statute remains on
the books, but Congress enacted few new mandatory minimums until,
ignited by an apparent upsurge in drug use by young Americans, it
passed the Boggs Act in 1951.6 Congress then further stiffened the
mandatory minimum sentences for drug-related crimes by passing the
Narcotic Control Act of 1956.1 In that Act, the legislature promulgated
severe minimum sentences to deter drug importation and distribution.'
However, by 1970, mandatory minimums had fallen into disfavor with
Congress amid reports from judges and prosecutors that the sentences
were unjustly severe and ineffective at deterring drug crimes.' More-
* Associate Member, 1994-95 University of Cincinnati Law Review.
1. Marc Miller & Daniel J. Freed, Editors' Observations: The Chasm Between the Judi-
ciary and the Congress over Mandatory Minimum Sentences, 6 FED. SENTENCING REP. 59, 59
(1993).
2. Id.
3. Michael M. Baylson, Mandatory Minimums: A Federal Prosecutor's Point of View, 40
FED. BAR NEWS & J. 167, 167 (1993).
4. Id.
5. See ch. 9, § 3, 1 Stat. 112, 113 (1790) (codified as amended at 18 U.S.C. §§ 1651, 1652
(1988)) (regarding piracy under the Law of Nations and by United States citizens, respectively).
6. ch. 666, 65 Stat. 767 (1951) (codified at 21 U.S.C. § 174) (repealed 1970). The public
held lenient judges largely to blame for increased drug use among the young. Eric Schlosser,
Marijuana and the Law, ATLANTIC MONTHLY, Sept. 1994, at 85. In an attempt to appear
tough on drug-related crime, some congressmen proposed life sentences and even the death pen-
alty for any violation of the Narcotics Import and Export Act. Id.
7. Narcotic Control Act of 1956, Pub. L. No. 84-728, 70 Stat. 651.
8. S. REP. No. 1997, 84th Cong., 2d Sess. 6 (1956).
9. U.S. SENTENCING COMM'N, MANDATORY MINIMUM PENALTIES IN THE FEDERAL
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: A SPECIAL REPORT TO CONGRESS 6-7 nn.14-19 (1991) [hereinaf-
ter SPECIAL REPORT]; see also Schlosser, supra note 6, at 85.
1851](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/ucinlr63&div=60&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
Mandatory Minimum Sentencing: Discretion, the Safety Valve, and the Sentencing Guidelines
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most