Sentencing Proposal Report-State vs Stu Dents Court Case

Sentencing Proposal Report-State vs. Stu Dents Court Case

Sentencing Options

Mr. Dents faces serious allegations, most of which have been proven true by the court. Of the five allegations labeled against Mr. Dent, homicide, drug-related crimes, kidnapping, and the assault of a police officer have been proven by the court. However, there was insufficient evidence to justify the burglary charge since the prosecution failed to prove that the defendant took the deceased’s items without permission. As a defense, we must develop a solid argument to convince judges to give our client the fairest sentencing based on the four accounts upon which he was found guilty.

Judges will likely pursue many options regarding the defendant’s sentencing. The first sentencing decision is expected to be based on the homicide charge. Considering the state where the victim’s body was found, even the homicide charge may eventually be treated as a first-degree murder (South Carolina Code 16-3-20). Mr. Dent will receive a life sentence or death sentence subject to state law.

On the other hand, the assault on a police officer amounts to a felony charge that may attract an additional ten years on top of the homicide sentencing. Mr. Dent accosted and assaulted a police officer at the time of his arrest. Assaulting a law enforcement officer is considered a severe offense in most states. In South Carolina, in particular, even mere threatening a police officer with bodily harm amounts to assault (South Carolina Code 16-3-20). Because Mr. Dent forced his fist into Officer T. Chur, the former is liable to sentencing based on assault.

Desired Punishment Outcome and Plea Bargaining

It is evident why the court has found Mr. Dents to be guilty of Uma Opee’s death. There is overwhelming evidence to prove that, indeed, Mr. Dents was directly involved in the homicide. A homicide charge in South Carolina carries 30 years imprisonment without the possibility of parole. However, there is still a possibility that the prosecution may piece together all evidence available and use it to argue for lifetime sentencing. One of the arguments that the prosecution could use to defend a life sentence is that Mr. Dents took the life of Opee; hence, there is nothing that prevents him from repeating the same if he is allowed back into society. The court may be obliged to give lifetime sentencing so that the accused will never return to the community again.

A plea bargain is possible under the South Carolina justice system. However, only the defense and the prosecutor are allowed to participate in a plea hearing, but the defendant cannot participate in the negotiations. Broadly, the prosecution is powerful during the plea bargain process, and only they can determine the scope of the entire process. Given the likelihood that drugs were involved before the actual crime, the defense may argue that drug consumption played a crucial role in influencing Mr. Dent’s behavior. After the homicide, Mr. Dent shouted that he saw aliens. Such a rant can be a solid justification for a successful plea bargain. The likely outcome of a plea bargain is the reduction of Mr. Dent’s sentencing from a death sentence to a life sentence (South Carolina Code 16-3-20).

Alternative and Intermediate Sanctions

The process does not end there once a jury finds a suspect guilty. Sentencing is a continuous process involving intermediate and alternative sanctions. Intermediate sanctions usually occur within probation and incarceration. People convicted of minor offenses are subject to benefit from intermediate sanctions before they are released to the community, and they act as a form of rehabilitation. In this case, Mr. Dent may be subjected to intermediate sanctions as he awaits his sentencing. However, the US has little intermediate punishment for offenders.

House arrest and electronic monitoring are the most effective alternative sentencing for Mr. Dent’s case. In house arrest and electronic monitoring programs, offenders must stay in their residences for a period determined by the court. However, an offender can leave home in particular circumstances, such as medical treatment.

Applying the Eighth Amendment to Stu Dent’s Case

The US Constitution’s Eighth Amendment bans the application of excessive bail, fines, and extreme and unusual punishment against offenders. The amendment protects defendants from exploitation by the state by obtaining fines from defenders to grant them pretrial release or give a harsh punishment after conviction (Stinneford, 2008).

According to Stinneford (2008), the Eighth Amendment could be used in Mr. Dent’s case to decide between a life or death sentence. Firstly, the prosecution could argue that giving Mr. Dent a death sentence amounts to an unusual punishment that should be avoided. Secondly, If Mr. Dent is sentenced to death, the Eighth Amendment can also be used to decide the methods of his execution. The constitutional clause protects offenders from cruel practices such as using the three-drug cocktails to execute a convict. In a life sentence, the defense can use the clause to protect Mr. Dent from prolonged solitary confinement.

References

South Carolina Code 16-3-20. Punishment for murder; separate sentencing proceeding when death penalty sought. (2018). Retrieved from https://www.lawserver.com/law/state/south-  Carolina/sc-code/south_carolina_code_16-3-        20

Stinneford, J. F. (2008). The original meaning of unusual: The Eighth Amendment as a bar to cruel innovation. Nw. UL Rev., 102, 1739.

ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE

We’ll write everything from scratch

Sentencing Proposal Report-State vs. Stu Dents Court Case

Write a sentencing proposal based on the information below.

After a defendant receives a guilty verdict, more work must be done. This assignment allows you to explore sentencing options as you continue to think about the case your learning team worked on in Week 3. Read the ruling carefully and return to the case specifics in Week 3 if you need a refresher. Refer to How Courts Work: Steps in a Trial: Plea Bargaining from the American Bar Association website as you work on this assignment.

The ruling for State v. Stu Dents is in, and the defendant, your law firm’s client, was found guilty. As a paralegal, your task now is to help the attorney consider the sentencing options for the client and determine what to propose to the court.
In the case of State v. Stu Dents, the jury found the defendant guilty of the following:
• Homicide
• Assault of a police officer
• Kidnapping
• Crimes related to drugs
For the burglary charge, the defendant is not guilty due to a lack of evidence that the victim’s possessions were taken without her permission.

Read the Ruling on State v. Stu Dents. Use this information as the basis for your sentencing proposal.

Write an 825-word sentencing proposal in which you address the following:

Formulate two distinct sentencing arguments.
Identify the desired outcome of each punishment. Is a plea bargain a consideration? If so, what is that desired outcome?
Identify alternative and intermediate sanctions.
Explain how the Eighth Amendment influences the outcomes of this case.

Format your paper according to APA guidelines.

helpful link https://www.americanbar.org/groups/public_education/resources/law_related_education_network/how_courts_work/pleabargaining/