Criminal justice systems in the United States—in both state and federal courts—traditionally allowed judges to consider all of the facts and circumstances of a case to determine a convicted defendant’s appropriate sentence. But the United States Congress and many state legislatures have passed laws that force judges to give fixed jail or prison terms (mandatory minimum sentences) to persons convicted of certain crimes—often drug offenses, but also certain gun, pornography, and economic crimes.

For example, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines are non-binding rules that provide a uniform sentencing policy for defendants convicted of crimes in the United States federal court system. The Federal Sentencing Guidelines are not mandatory, but judges must consider them when determining a criminal defendant’s sentence—and when a judge exercises discretion and departs from the Guidelines, the judge must explain what factors warranted the increased or decreased sentence—known as an upward departure or a downward departure.

In Wyoming, as in other states, the criminal justice system has historically granted judges the discretion to consider a wide range of factors when determining sentences for convicted defendants. However, both federal law and some state statutes have introduced mandatory minimum sentences for certain offenses, which limit judicial discretion by setting fixed penalties that must be imposed for specific crimes. These crimes often include drug offenses, as well as certain gun, pornography, and economic crimes. At the federal level, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines provide a framework for sentencing, which judges are required to consider, though they are not strictly bound by them. When federal judges deviate from these guidelines, they must provide an explanation for their decision, whether it is an upward or downward departure from the recommended sentence. While Wyoming state law may have its own sentencing guidelines and mandatory minimums for certain state-level crimes, the principles of mandatory minimums and the consideration of sentencing guidelines similarly aim to create consistency in sentencing while still allowing for judicial discretion under certain circumstances.