what do they mean when they sentence a person 25 to life.?
602708
The person is supposed to serve at least 25 years in prison. That's the minimum if they behave perfectly. For everything they do wrong, that is against prison rules, they get more time added on and can possibly spend the rest of their life in prison.
104135
Actually, there is a report on this on the CA Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation site... the link is:\nhttp://www.cdcr.ca.gov/ReportsResearch/docs/Quarterly/Strike1/STRIKE1d0509.pdf\n..this is just for CA alone... basically it says that the total number of inmates on their 2nd or 3rd strike is 40,587\n\nThese strikes, espcially the 3rd (which gives 25 to life), are from any type of felony (violent or non-violent)...\n\n..and in comment to the previous answer... to put it this way, It actually costs the state and tax payers more money to put someone on death row and actually kill them, than to have them in prison for life without the possibility of parole. (the difference being millions of dollars)
699424
A wise and experienced judge weighs both justice and circumstances.  The purposes of imprisonment in this case would be to ensure the crime is not committed again (done, by virtue of his being too ill to drive ever again) and to ensure that he is made to pay a price for what he did (done, by probation).\n\nIf an 89-year-old man went outside with a shotgun and purposely murdered people, that would be different and I believe handled differently by a judge.  This was, for the most part, an accident.  I agree that there is no reason to spend taxpayer money to imprison a very ill man when he will surely never drive again and is experiencing punishment that probably goes beyond what prison could inflict upon him anyway.
183879
It would help curb *senseless* crime if it were actually used when it should be. What kills me is the "life without parole" sentences - if that prisoner can never be rehabilitated, what use is (s)he?
79823
The most common usage of the term is in criminal law, which is what I presume you are asking about.  Sometimes, as part of a plea bargain, the defendant will plead guilty and be sentenced to "time served".  In other words, the time that the person has already served in custody from the time of the arrest to the time of the plea bargain is sufficient punish for the crime.\n\nA sentence of "time served" means they are now eligible for release assuming they comply with any other terms of the plea bargain.
674639
probably by young adulthood... 25 years old
362624
Each state has its own set of sentencing guidelines.\n\nAs to the other apart of your statement, the charge would stick, as long as the person lives...additional charges would be filed if should they die as a result of the action. And NO, the judge isn't going to lenient because you're a lousy shot!
677152
That's a good idea, actually- but I don't know what the sentence should be...\n\nMaybe three years mandatory in prison (minimum!)- without the possibility of getting out early. But if the crime is premeditated and cruel, then the sentence should be more severe.
186390
To them its not natural.  Its something that was punishable by at least imprisonment. Its like with other countries with oppressed societies.  If you are different in some way you are out casted.  In some societies its imprisonment, while others its death.
367733
life sentence prison?
107856
if it was a murder they did when they were in their twenties, and they are in their 70's, there really isnt much harm in releasing them. However, if they are like tookie williams who can still give orders to a gang or a mob, then by all means, yes keep him in jail for life.
746647
I am in law enforcement in Maine. The punishment depends on a number of things, including the discretion of the court, your criminal history and the nature of the crime. I encourage you to call the (non-emergency line of) your local police department and you can ask anonymously what sentence that statute holds. I will tell you that officers HATE to take these calls, because there is such a variance from crime to crime and person to person, so you won't get a specific answer, only a possibility.
681196
they've completed their sentence.\n\nif they have family the body will be released to them or if not they'll be buried in a crappy city grave.
945320
You have to have been 18 at the time of the commission of the crime. The SCOTUS decided this in case law just last year in Roper v Simmons. This explains why Malvo, the younger of the two "DC snipers" cannot receive the death penalty while the older can.
674676
Yes I agree with the death penalty. Life in prison is not a punishment for long term prisoners. Three meals a day, cable TV, no bills. They think it's a good life.
194710
Not as many years as you should be sentenced to for being guilty of slaughtering and assaulting the English language. Oh my gosh! "Found guilty," "manslaughter," "assault."\n\nBut I'm not winning any friends that way. Here's an answer to your question:\n\nIt depends upon the jurisdiction, whether the judge has to use mandatory minimum sentencing, whether the guilty person had a prior record, whether s/he is a juvenile. It depends upon whether the person was found guilty in a trial and the sentence was recommended by a jury, or decided strictly by the judge; or, whether the defendant took a plea bargain from the district attorney and allocuted to the crime in front of a judge; and, whether the judge followed the sentencing recommendations laid out in the plea bargain. \n\nIn some jurisdictions the charges that you have mentioned are simple and straightforward; in others, there may be degrees of seriousness of each. In New York, there is manslaughter in the "first degree" and in the "second degree." They mean different things and have different punishments associated with them.\n\nIf this person is awaiting or in the middle of the trial, the jury will possibly have some say over whether lesser-included charges can dictate the sentence. There are two ways: one is by "jury nullification," where they come up with their own charge (very rare); another is that in some jurisdictions the jury can be instructed to find a person guilty of the most serious crime that the person has committed if they believe that the prosecutor has proven guilt, but not all of the facts of the highest charge. For instance: if someone were charged with manslaughter, and was obviously guilty of involvement in the murder but had not intended to kill the victim, the jury might be able to come back with a verdict of negligent homicide.\n\nOther factors: how much time did the person spend in jail before and after the indictment? Will that be deducted from the final sentence as time-served? Is the DA trying the person for both manslaughter and aggravated assault, or is the second somehow a lesser-included charge? Will the judge run the sentences consecutively or concurrently? (The defendant might get 7 years for manslaughter and 2 for aggravated assault. If concurrent, the max is 7 years; if consecutive, the person is being sentenced to 9 years.)\n\nYour question, though, is about how many years the person would serve. Besides the variables in sentencing, there would be considerations for good behavior and decisions by the parole board. So there's no way, with the information that you've given, that anyone could tell you exactly how long the defendant you describe would have to stay in jail.
336304
Two out of five ain't bad, I guess.\n\nProbation is part of a sentence, so it starts when you are sentenced.  When it ends, is largely up to you.  Some folks seem to want to drag it on forever.