It’s crazy how the sentencing for crimes vary so much all over. (1 Viewer)

[eoMMan]

Below is link to a guy here in FL getting a 30 year sentence for robbing a Starbucks and holding the teenage employee captive at knifepoint. Horrible crime and the guy is a definite POS but I was surprised to read he got 30 years. You hear of some murderers getting 20 years (and sometimes less).

Link

I realize there’s a lot more to this such as location (state and local), prior record, etc. but still.

Anyone else surprised by sentences sometimes?

 

[Zow]

Below is link to a guy here in FL getting a 30 year sentence for robbing a Starbucks and holding the teenage employee captive at knifepoint. Horrible crime and the guy is a definite POS but I was surprised to read he got 30 years. You hear of some murderers getting 20 years (and sometimes less).

Link

I realize there’s a lot more to this such as location (state and local), prior record, etc. but still.

Anyone else surprised by sentences sometimes?

Yes. And I know all the laws, factors, etc. that should be in play to determine the outcome. 

The above in mind, I'm sympathetic to the general public and your takeaway is absolutely a reasonable one. All I can say to that is essentially three things: 

1. Know that what's being reported - through no fault of the reporter - is probably ~<25% of all the actual facts that go into it. 

2. Know that in many states some of the legislated sentencing guidelines/ranges may seem nonsensical and/or are written in a way to produce unfair/nonsensical outcomes that were perhaps not foreseen. And that there are some of us who regularly try to fight them.  

3. Know that whether a defendant went to trial versus taking a plea agreement likely impacted the disparate outcome. Anecdotally, I've spoken to legislators who openly admit that they create harsher sentencing laws than they may believe are "just" because there are people like me trying to and usually successfully negotiating for less time to avoid the harsh trial range exposure. So, if a defendant rolls the proverbial dice at trial and loses, usually the outcome is quite harsh. 

In short, since the general public isn't privy to a majority of the information that goes into criminal cases and their results, it's going to seem confusing, perplexing, disparate, etc. You can then choose whether to have faith in the system or not. 

 

[-OZ-]

Yes. And I know all the laws, factors, etc. that should be in play to determine the outcome. 

The above in mind, I'm sympathetic to the general public but your takeaway is absolutely a reasonable one. All I can say to that is essentially three things: 

1. Know that what's being reported - through no fault of the reporter - is probably ~<25% of all the actual facts that go into it. 

2. Know that in many states some of the legislated sentencing guidelines/ranges may seem nonsensical and/or are written in a way to produce unfair/nonsensical outcomes that were perhaps not foreseen. And that there are some of us who regularly try to fight them.  

3. Know that whether a defendant went to try versus taking a plea agreement likely impacted the disparate outcome. Anecdotally, I've spoken to legislators who openly admit that they create harsher sentencing laws than they may believe are "just" because there are people like me trying to and usually successfully negotiating for less time to avoid the harsh trial range exposure. So, if a defendant rolls the proverbial dice at trial and loses, usually the outcome is quite harsh. 

In short, since the general public isn't privy to a majority of the information that does into criminal cases and their results, it's going to see confusing, perplexing, disparate, etc. You can then choose whether to have faith in the system or not. 

While I think #3 has gotten excessive and arguably unjust, It makes sense in many ways. First, pleading tends to indicate some level of acceptance of their responsibility and hopefully makes the person less likely to repeat the offense. Plus, as you know better than most, trials are expensive. 

 

[Zow]

While I think #3 has gotten excessive and arguably unjust, It makes sense in many ways. First, pleading tends to indicate some level of acceptance of their responsibility and hopefully makes the person less likely to repeat the offense. Plus, as you know better than most, trials are expensive. 

Agreed.