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 New Jersey, as in other states, the criminal justice system has experienced a shift from traditional discretionary sentencing to a more structured approach due to the implementation of mandatory minimum sentences for certain offenses. These mandatory minimums are often applied to drug offenses, specific gun crimes, and other designated felonies, limiting the discretion of judges to consider the unique circumstances of each case when determining sentences. However, New Jersey judges still retain some discretion in sentencing for crimes that do not carry mandatory minimums. At the federal level, the Federal Sentencing Guidelines provide a framework for sentencing uniformity, although they are advisory rather than mandatory. Judges must consider these guidelines when sentencing defendants in federal court, but they are allowed to depart from them if they provide clear reasons for doing so. This can result in either an upward or downward departure from the suggested sentencing range. It's important to note that while the guidelines are not binding, appellate courts may review sentences that deviate from them, which adds a layer of oversight to the sentencing process.