However, it is unlikely that one system will ever be sacrificed entirely. Also, there are cases when jurisdiction between federal and state overlap, such as "any lawsuit where citizens of different states are involved in disputes concerning at least $50,000, the person being sued can insist on federal court," and "some criminal acts that involve single events or multiple events that violate both federal and state laws simultaneously ("Michigan Court System, the Civics Institute, 2004). This also means that combining the two systems would not be feasible, especially given how the system of laws in America currently exists. Question

Outline the various sentencing goals. Which of these goals do you find most acceptable as the primary goal of sentencing? How might your choice of goal vary with the type of offense? Can you envision any circumstances which might make your choice less acceptable?

Sentencing goals may include providing punishment levels that reflect the seriousness of the offense, affording adequate deterrence to criminal conduct, protecting the public from further crimes of the defendant, and avoiding unwarranted sentence disparities among defendants with similar crimes (Maxfield, 2003, pp.3-4). Ultimately, the most serious result of ignoring one of these guidelines would be a sentence that did not protect the public from further crimes of the defendant. The most obvious scenario might be that of a guilty, violent murderer or rapist who was likely to commit another crime, without long-term incarceration.

For example, regarding the seriousness of the offense, an example of consumer fraud might warrant a harsh penalty, if it was done with a flagrant lack of concern for the public's health and well-being, even if the defendant could not commit the crime again, because he or she no longer had his or her executive job. Deterrence might be the goal in harshly punishing a white-collar, so-called victimless crime like insider trading. And even the final goal, although presumably criminals draw little sympathy when they cry 'unfair' might have merit regarding a petty drug user or a speeding ticket -- it might be considered unjust to 'throw the book' at a criminal for a small crime that usually garners a light sentence. Finally, in some cases different considerations might hold sway, such as in the juvenile courts where rehabilitation rather than retribution might be the primary goal of sentencing and thus warrant different guidelines.
Works Cited

Chapter 10: The American Legal System and the Courts." Chapter Summary from Keeping the Republic. Washington DC: CQ Press. 2007.

The Michigan Court System. The Civics Institute. 2004. 28 Feb 2007. http://www.civicsinstitute.org/curricula/high/The_Michigan_Court_System.html

Maxfield, Linda Drazga. "Final Report: Sentencing." Office of Policy Analysis.

Report of U.S. Sentencing Commission. Mar 2003. 28 Feb 2007. http://www.ussc.gov/judsurv/execsum.pdf