Mandatory sentences have become common in the criminal justice system, requiring definitive sentences to be imposed in each relevant case. in maryland, for example a second-time drug distribution charge can result in a mandatory 10-year prison sentence and someone using a handgun in the commission of certain felonies face a mandatory 5-year sentence. what are the pros and cons of having such mandatory sentences? what is your view regarding the imposition of such sentences? are they effective? why or why not?

Explanation:

Mandatory sentences have a general rule, a judge will decide the punishment once the trial is done.  This law came to stop drug crimes.  

The pros of this law are a way to stop drug distribution and prevent them from committing more drug crimes.  

But at the same time is unjust, and doesn’t allow for the judge to be flexible in the process of sentencing individuals, where in some cases they might be innocent.  

These sentencing laws are starting to fail, some lawmakers, and states begun to have other alternatives such as instead of jail, they are forced into treatment programs.  They are called drug court and they are more cost effective. And prevent once they are out of jail keep committing crimes.  

anticipatory breach of contract

as the name suggests, an anticipatory breach is a breach of contract before the time of performance. so, if a promisor denies to perform his promise and signifies his unwillingness before the time for performance, then it is an anticipatory breach of contract.

and

actual breach of contract

while an anticipatory breach is before the time of performance, an actual breach of contract is on the scheduled time of performance of the contract. an actual breach of contract can be committed either.

hope this . : )

answer:

insta

explanation: