When it is announced that an individual is accused of a crime, most of the people will tend to believe that a legal procedure will take the usual route by going through the available local courts. In fact, there are two tracks of criminal justice system in the United States- the state courts and the federal courts. Although both systems deal with criminal cases, the manner in which criminal cases are given their sentences can vary drastically.
Federal sentencing tends to be more organized, complicated and in most instances harsher than the one faced by defendants in state courts. Due to these distinctions, any person who will be charged by the federal government must seriously consider hiring an experienced criminal defense attorney as early as possible. Federal cases are known to have their own rules, procedures, and sentencing policies that might demand legal prudence at the very beginning. Learning more about the federal sentencing process, and the difference between it and the state sentencing process can allow the rest of the accused individuals and their families to improve their work with the legal process.
Why Some Crimes Are Prosecuted in Federal Court
Table of Contents
The criminal cases in the United States are majorly prosecuted at the state level. These are crimes like assault, stealing, DUI and numerous other crimes that are under jurisdiction of the local law enforcement units. The federal charges are usually instigated whereby a crime committed is of interstate nature, federal property, federal agencies, or a crime against federal law. Some of the examples are drug trafficking, financial crimes, immigration crime and interstate crimes.
Since the investigation usually involves a lot of evidence and complicated cases because of the fact the federal agencies like the FBI, DEA, or Secret Service often take extensive investigation time prior to charging an individual. Such an investigation may influence the process of trials and sentencing of the case.
Federal Sentencing Is Guided by Formal Sentencing Guidelines
Formal sentencing guidelines in the federal court is one of the greatest disparities between federal and state sentencing. The federal judges make use of the United States Sentencing Guideline which is an elaborate system aimed at ensuring uniformity in sentencing around the United States. The guidelines take into account situations like the severity of the crime and criminal record of the defendant.
Every federal crime is given a sentencing tier. Enhancements or adjustments constitute additional factors which can elevate or diminish that level with regards to certain circumstances of a case. The outcome level of offense and type of criminal history implies a sentencing range which should be targeted. Although judges are not expected to adhere to the guidelines unquestionably, they are likely to keep them in mind when passing the sentence. It is a relatively predictable system considering the results in comparison to some state courts.
State Sentencing Often Allows More Judicial Discretion
Different state courts use different approaches to sentencing. In some states, the guideline systems are analogous to those of the federal system, but in many the judges have more options of choosing suitable penalties. At the state court level, the judges are very free to take into consideration the background of the defendant, circumstances surrounding the crime, and the victimization effect in most cases. This flexibility at times causes the number of potentially possible sentences of a similar offense to increase. Judicial discretion may enable the delivery of individualised punishment results, but will also raise less predictability in the sentencing as compared to the federal system.
Mandatory Minimum Sentences Are More Common in Federal Cases
Mandatory minimum sentencing is common to the federal criminal laws. These are laws that make judges to sentence a defendant at least to a specified minimum punishment in case the defendant is found guilty of some offenses. Among the crimes with mandatory minimums in practice, there exist drug trafficking, crimes involving firearms, and some other financial types of crimes. The right of the judge to lessen the penalty can be restricted even when there exist mitigating factors when a mandatory minimum sentence is discharged.
Certainly, state courts apply legally mandatory minimums in some cases, yet they are widely less common than federal cases. Such compulsory sentencing policy helps in creating perceptions that the federal punishments are often harsher.
Federal Investigations Often Lead to Stronger Cases
The other reason why federal sentences may be important is the nature of federal investigations. Many federal law enforcement agencies normally take long periods of time to accumulate evidence prior to the charge. The investigations can include monetary evidence and communication via electronic communication, surveillance, or, often, confidential informants. Prosecutors can have voluminous documentation by the time charges are brought against the person under investigation. Subsequently, due to this preparation, the federal prosecutors tend to end up following those cases where there is a high chance of conviction. This relationship has the potential to affect the outcome of sentencing and the plea bargain.
Understanding the Stakes in Federal Court
Federal level criminal cases are usually known to be serious because of the nature of the charges given as well as the organized sentencing system that is applied in criminal cases. Mandatory minimums, sentencing guidelines and the use of wide array of resources, including investigative ones, imply that a defendant has to work in a highly technical legal arena.
Whereas the penalties meted by state courts are equally heavy, the federal system is likely to focus on uniformity and rigid standards of sentencing. In the situation of anyone who confronts federal charges, these differences, and an early engagement with qualified legal counsel can be an enormous benefit in the manner in which the case is going to be handled. When imprisonment and possible legal ramifications that may affect one need to be considered over the long term, preparation and proficient legal advice becomes an indispensable part of a defense team of any kind.
