Sara M. Webster Criminal Law Blog on Lawyers.com

MANDATORY MINIMUM SENTENCING UNDER ATTACK IN PA

Tuesday, February 26, 2013 by Sara M. Webster

Photo of Sara M. Webster

Pennsylvania mandatory sentencing is subject to attack where a Judge rather than a jury decides the facts that determine whether a mandatory sentence applies.

            For years now it has been the Judge deciding whether a mandatory sentence applies.  For example, the quantity of drugs and whether a gun was present or used in a crime are facts which trigger mandatory sentencing.  These facts should not be found by a Judge at sentencing.  At sentencing there is a lesser standard of proof which is proof, i.e. by a preponderance of the evidence.  Our Constitutional right to a jury trial and due process requires the higher standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

            Your attorney should argue for this higher standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt.  This issue should be preserved at sentencing and in a post-sentencing motion.  The United States Supreme Court is currently deciding whether this important Constitutional right of proof beyond a reasonable doubt applies to facts which enhance a sentence.

 
Posted at 12:44 PM
Topic: Criminal Law
Lawyers.com Blog

Lawyers.comSM Blog

Get an inside view of
Lawyers.com

Blog Topics

Bloggers

Archives

Recent...