Imagine receiving a 25-year prison sentence with no possible chance of parole. There is not even a way the sentence can be reduced from the start. For repeat offenders, this is becoming common in the American criminal justice system. Now imagine it is the first offence, and yet there is still a 25-year to life sentence imposed. This situation is quite common in many states, i.e. Michigan. The question must be asked: Are mandatory minimum sentences in drug offences truly just in today's society? Sentences like these are unfair to many of those convicted under them. Mandatory minimum sentences have been filling American prison systems with first-time, non-violent offenders, the majority of which are drug offenders. Since these sentences cannot be reduced, room has to be made for all of the incoming prisoners. In order for the room to be made, violent offenders are usually released early. Not only are these sentences unfair to the offenders, but because of the extreme sentences, they are costly to the American taxpayer.
Mandatory minimum sentences have a deep history in the American criminal justice system. There have been mandatory minimum sentencing laws present in America since the late 1790's. One of the original offences that carried a minimum penalty of death was "robbery by pirates" (Schlosser 84). Present day mandatory minimum sentencing laws were established during the early 1970's. As stated in Grayson, " . Mandatory minimums sounded like a great idea when they were passed- (4). There are currently mandatory minimum sentences present throughout the U.S for minimal drug crimes. They range from the intent to sell narcotics to possession of narcotics. In the state of Michigan there is "the so-called 650 Lifer Law" (Fannon 48). This law state that any individual caught in possession with intent to sell 650 grams of cocaine or heroin must receive a life sentence without a possibility of parole.