Reference no: EM133301245

A 27-year-old African American accepted $500 from a neighbor for sending in the mail what he knew was a package of drugs, although he did not know the kind of drugs or their value. He did it because he faced mounting debts. He has a college education, a job, and no prior criminal record. He pleaded guilty to the federal crime, which requires a mandatory minimum sentence for anyone convicted of trafficking more than 50 grams of crack cocaine. You are the federal judge assigned this case. The defendant faces a mandatory minimum sentence of ten years in federal prison with no possibility of parole. A mandatory minimum requires anyone convicted of the crime to receive the minimum sentence prescribed by law, regardless of any other factors that may be present in the case. Mandatory minimum sentences increased dramatically in the 1980s as a result of the so-called war on drugs during the Reagan administration. The issue posed by mandatory minimums is that any features of the defendant's character, history, or circumstances that might call for a lesser punishment must be ignored. The sentence can be increased, however, if the defendant has a criminal record, sells drugs to children, or sells very large amounts of drugs. You are having trouble with this case because it appears that the mandatory minimum sentence law treats all drug law violations of this type, as if they were the same; however, offenders and circumstances dramatically differ in terms of seriousness and dangerousness, and you do not believe this offender is dangerous or deserving of ten years in prison.

?Evaluate the moral permissibility of your decision to impose the mandatory minimum sentence in this case.