The authors of the current study examine mandatory minimum drug sentences from the viewpoint of cost-effectiveness at achieving such national drug control objectives as reducing cocaine consumption and cocaine-related crime.
Evidence that juries treat corporate defendants less favorably than individual defendants is often cited in support of the widely held view that juries are biased against wealthy "deep-pocket" defendants.
In most states, that system makes little or no allowance for the disabilities of such offenders, resulting in dispositions that are inequitably harsh and in all likelihood costlier to the public than need be the case.
The report traces the stages in the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 (CJRA) implementation: the recommendations of the advisory groups, the plans adopted by the districts, and the plans actually implemented.
The Civil Justice Reform Act (CJRA) of 1990 is rooted in more than a decade of concern that cases in federal courts take too long and cost litigants too much. As a consequence, proponents of reform argue, some individuals are denied access to justice.
The authors report on the benefits and costs of California's new mandatory-sentencing law, which provides for progressively longer sentences with an increasing number of prior convictions for serious felonies.