The Federal Sentencing Principles and Guidelines
The basic principle of federal sentencing guidelines is determining the sentence for major criminal misdemeanors (not lower than class A) based on the sentencing table. The sentencing table combines two main factors to consider in deciding the sentencing range: the offensive level, which is the product of considering the conduct associated with the given offense, and the criminal story of the defendant. Two factors have different categories which together determine the recommended sentence which in turn will fall into one of the four sentencing zones. (2016 Guidelines Manual, United States Sentencing Commission (2017), http://www.ussc.gov/guidelines/2016-guidelines-manual (last visited Jan 9, 2017).
Minnesota state sentencing guidelines work with the same principle of the table which combines two factors – offense level and criminal conduct. The guidelines underline equity in sentencing which is the result of many amendments and adjustments. (Guidelines / Minnesota.gov, Minnesota.gov (2017), https://mn.gov/sentencing-guidelines/guidelines/currentguidelines.jsp (last visited Jan 9, 2017). One of the major differences with the federal guidelines is that Minnesota State decided not to increase prison capacity intentionally. It means that the sentencing commission allocates existing amount of prison beds in a rational way, in opposite to federal approach, where commission decides how many prison beds are needed. This difference led to multiple adjustments in the Minnesota sentencing guidelines and its commentaries. All adjustments were meant to decrease a number of prisoners and as a result to diminish confinement level according to the sentencing table. It created a lot of controversies because the same crimes became less punishable in Minnesota. The latest amendments reduced sentences for some drug crimes what makes certain areas of the country more vulnerable. In my opinion, those standards must be the same and to not differ in the level of punishment for the same …