20 Year Penalty Of Manslaughter

239 Words1 Page
If I was the sentencing judge going over all the facts. Seeing the jury did not agree there was not enough clear and substantial evidence for a not guilty verdict but rather a lesser charge of man slaughter. The penalty I would impose would be a 10 year penalty since there was not enough evidence for a CLEAR manslaughter charge. I find a 20 year prison sentence way too harsh of a penalty. A 10 year sentence is no small sentence but if I were to impose the maximum 20 year sentence would need see proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the person had committed the crime of manslaughter and there was no self-defense argument. Even with a conviction of a single assault charge and some other drug changes. I do not think he is a high risk offender.
Show More
Related

  • The Pros And Cons Of Euthanasia

    1358 Words  | 6 Pages

    Euthanasia is the termination of an extremely ill person’s life in order to relieve them from the suffering the illness is causing. Euthanasia is normally a decision for a person with a hopeless condition, however there are different examples when willful extermination can be completed. In numerous nations, for example, the UK, it is illicit to help anybody in executing themselves. Should a critically ill patient in a lot of pain and discomfort be permitted to end their life, if that is what the

    Read More

  • Sati Practice In India

    2290 Words  | 10 Pages

    Sati practice will be convicted for manslaughter therefore such a person could receive death sentence. However after passing this law some Hindus made an appeal to Privy Council in England But it had been

    Read More

More about 20 Year Penalty Of Manslaughter

Open Document