Knowledge

Judicial discretion

Source 📝

22: 142:
Judicial power, as contradistinguished from the power of the laws, has no existence. Courts are the mere instruments of the law, and can will nothing. When they are said to exercise a discretion, it is a mere legal discretion, a discretion to be exercised in discerning the course prescribed by law;
143:
and, when that is discerned, it is the duty of the court to follow it. Judicial power is never exercised for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the judge, always for the purpose of giving effect to the will of the legislature; or, in other words, to the will of the law.
187:
and dropping the charges carrying mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory sentencing laws have been particularly popular among legislators in the United States. This has provoked formation of non-profit organizations such as
267: 167:
are examples of laws carrying severe consequences, and which does not leave room for sentencing judges to consider the actual gravity of the offense, thus significantly limiting judicial discretion in
32: 164: 294: 102:. Where appropriate, judicial discretion allows a judge to decide a legal case or matter within a range of possible decisions. 189: 171:. Introduction of mandatory minimum in criminal sentencing is often viewed as a shift of judicial power from judges to 66: 249:"Mandatory Minimum Penalties: Their Effects on Crime, Sentencing Disparities, and Justice System Expenditures" 44: 248: 176: 152: 48: 184: 193: 284: 99: 40: 289: 156: 91: 8: 160: 128: 110: 268:
Exercising Discretion: Decision-making in the criminal justice system and beyond
234: 168: 175:, who are capable of affecting the length of potential sentence through their 105:
However, where the exercise of discretion goes beyond constraints set down by
278: 135: 209: 114: 200:
to lobby for reinstatement of judicial discretion in criminal sentencing.
123: 118: 106: 214: 180: 172: 148: 87: 83: 117:, the court may be abusing its discretion and undermining the 95: 31:
deal primarily with United States law and do not represent a
197: 121:. In that case, the decision of the court may be 276: 251:. Department of Justice Canada. 11 January 2002. 86:to make some legal decisions according to their 29:The examples and perspective in this article 265:Gelsthorpe, Loraine and Padfield, Nicola. 67:Learn how and when to remove this message 127:, and may sometimes be characterized as 155:issues have led to the introduction of 98:to exercise discretion is an aspect of 277: 138:wrote the following on this subject: 15: 235:Osborn V. Bank of the United States 190:Families Against Mandatory Minimums 13: 259: 14: 306: 165:sex offender registry laws in US 20: 295:Legal doctrines and principles 241: 227: 1: 220: 90:. Under the doctrine of the 7: 203: 43:, discuss the issue on the 10: 311: 134:In 1824, US Chief Justice 271:(Willan Publishing 2003). 147:Concerns with regard to 185:lesser included offense 238:, 22 U. S. 738 (1824). 194:Women Against Registry 145: 140: 100:judicial independence 157:mandatory sentencing 92:separation of powers 82:is the power of the 49:create a new article 41:improve this article 80:Judicial discretion 161:three-strikes laws 177:charging decision 129:judicial activism 111:binding precedent 94:, the ability of 77: 76: 69: 51:, as appropriate. 302: 253: 252: 245: 239: 231: 72: 65: 61: 58: 52: 24: 23: 16: 310: 309: 305: 304: 303: 301: 300: 299: 275: 274: 262: 260:Further reading 257: 256: 247: 246: 242: 232: 228: 223: 206: 73: 62: 56: 53: 38: 25: 21: 12: 11: 5: 308: 298: 297: 292: 287: 273: 272: 261: 258: 255: 254: 240: 225: 224: 222: 219: 218: 217: 212: 205: 202: 179:, e.g. filing 75: 74: 35:of the subject 33:worldwide view 28: 26: 19: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 307: 296: 293: 291: 288: 286: 283: 282: 280: 270: 269: 264: 263: 250: 244: 237: 236: 230: 226: 216: 213: 211: 208: 207: 201: 199: 195: 191: 186: 182: 178: 174: 170: 166: 162: 158: 154: 153:law and order 150: 144: 139: 137: 136:John Marshall 132: 130: 126: 125: 120: 116: 112: 108: 103: 101: 97: 93: 89: 85: 81: 71: 68: 60: 50: 46: 42: 36: 34: 27: 18: 17: 285:Criminal law 266: 243: 233: 229: 210:Aharon Barak 146: 141: 133: 122: 115:constitution 104: 79: 78: 63: 54: 30: 290:Judiciaries 173:prosecutors 124:ultra vires 119:rule of law 107:legislation 279:Categories 221:References 215:Close case 169:sentencing 151:and other 149:recidivism 113:, or by a 88:discretion 57:April 2023 163:and most 84:judiciary 45:talk page 204:See also 39:You may 181:charges 159:. E.g. 96:judges 109:, by 47:, or 198:RSOL 196:and 183:on 281:: 192:, 131:. 70:) 64:( 59:) 55:( 37:.

Index

worldwide view
improve this article
talk page
create a new article
Learn how and when to remove this message
judiciary
discretion
separation of powers
judges
judicial independence
legislation
binding precedent
constitution
rule of law
ultra vires
judicial activism
John Marshall
recidivism
law and order
mandatory sentencing
three-strikes laws
sex offender registry laws in US
sentencing
prosecutors
charging decision
charges
lesser included offense
Families Against Mandatory Minimums
Women Against Registry
RSOL

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.