The laws were meant to improve public safety. However, criminal lawyers and other legal experts say they may be destroying some of the most fundamental principles of the American justice system.

It works like this: Prosecutors offer defendants a significantly reduced sentence in exchange for pleading guilty. If the defendant chooses not to take the deal, the prosecutors levy nearly every charge possible. Thanks to mandatory minimums, it is not rare for defendants facing felony charges to be forced to choose between taking a plea and spending a year or two in prison or going to trial and risking decades behind bars.

Many defendants don't feel they can afford to take the chance, so they plead guilty to avoid going court. Essentially, defendants are being punished for asserting their constitutional right to be tried by a jury of their peers.

Even judges are decrying this trend. Many feel that the laws and some prosecutorial procedures take away their discretion and force them to impose harsh sentences that are clearly unfair given the nature of some defendants' situations.

Unfortunately, until the laws are changed, there may be little anyone can do to reverse this troubling trend. However, it is worth noting that experienced criminal defense attorneys can help to ensure that their clients' rights are as protected as possible.

The Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction estimates that the many reforms contained in the law will reduce the state inmate population by up to 7,000 in the next four years. That adds up to projected revenue savings of almost $50 million. Ohio's current prison population of over 50,000 exceeds design capacity by almost a third.

• Some nonviolent offenders will be diverted to community service
• Sentence reductions will be offered as incentives for completion of training programs and substance abuse or other treatment
• Crack cocaine possession sentences will be reduced to match those for powder cocaine offenses
• Prison officials must justify continued incarceration of elderly prisoners (65 or older)
• Adult certification of juvenile offenders will be more closely regulated

Former Ohio Attorney General and state legislator Jim Petro, who was previously charged with enforcing Ohio's tough-on-crime crackdown, expressed relief to The Columbus Dispatch: "It didn't work then, and it isn't working now."

However, some commentators lamented that the new law fails to remove barriers to employment of ex-offenders, and some estimate that the cost benefit to Ohio taxpayers could have approached $80 million if the law had employed all provisions recommended by a thorough study of sentencing reform by the Council of State Governments.

Nevertheless, H.B. 86 will offer a great number of Ohio's convicted offenders opportunities for diversion, incentives and reduced sentencing. If you have questions about how H.B. 86 may affect you or a loved one, please contact an experienced Ohio criminal defense attorney for advice.

Williams appealed, challenging the retroactive application of the new sex offender reporting guidelines. After a series of legal battles, on July 13, 2011, the Ohio Supreme Court issued an opinion in Williams' case, which struck down portions of the law. The Williams' ruling will have implications for thousands of the state's sex offenders.

Section 28, Article II of the Ohio Constitution says that "[t]he general assembly shall have no power to pass retroactive laws." In the past, retroactive sex offender registration schemes in Ohio (and throughout most of the country) have been upheld as remedial or regulatory measures; only laws that reach back in time and create new substantive burdens, duties, or liabilities are prohibited.

In the context of sex offender registry requirements, this means new Ohio laws cannot be applied to past behavior if they are punitive.

The Ohio Supreme Court looked at a number of factors to explore whether S.B. 10 was punitive in nature, as applied to Williams. Importantly, it was enacted in the criminal code and established criminal liability for failure to comply with some registration requirements. However, S.B. 10 also imposed significantly higher restrictions than those under the law in effect at the time of Williams' offense: under the old law, Williams likely would not have had to register at all, and at most would have been required to register as a sex offender for 10 years; under the new provisions, he was required to register for 25 years. In addition, S.B. 10 mandates more frequent registration and removes discretion in setting registration requirements.

Taken as a whole, a majority of the Ohio Supreme Court found S.B. 10 to be punitive, and thus inapplicable to Williams and all those who committed sex offenses prior to its enactment.

Effect on Sex Offenders

The new decision will have no impact on sex offenders whose crime occurred after the enactment of S.B. 10. However, hundreds of Ohio sex offenders retroactively sentenced under the new provisions will be able to ask for a reduction in registration requirements to reflect the law in place at the time of their offense. If you or a loved one was sentenced for a sex crime in Ohio after July 1, 2007 for an offense committed prior to that date, please contact an experienced criminal defense attorney to discuss your legal options.

Child pornography is considered to be any image or material that depicts a person under the age of 18 years engaged in or simulating an act of sexual conduct. While charges can be brought at the state or federal level, most child pornography crimes related to the internet are charged as federal crimes. Federal law prohibits:

• Possessing this material
• Distributing or exchanging it
• Employing children to participate in it
• Advertising it
• Developing, duplicating or printing it

It is a federal crime to possess, receive, distribute or produce child pornography in a way that affects interstate or foreign commerce. Federal charges may be brought if an image, or even the materials used to produce it, has been transported across state lines or via U.S. mail.

Federal lawmakers have taken advantage of the Internet's complexity to claim jurisdiction for nearly all charges involving online child pornography. It is a federal crime to email this material to someone in a different state or even over a server in a different state.

These charges can turn your world upside-down but they don't have to mark you for life. If you have been charged with a crime involving child pornography, contact an experienced defense attorney.

Despite the lack of an express mandate from Congress, many federal judges have been reluctant to sentence defendants convicted of cocaine-related offenses under the old sentencing scheme. Several judges have acted as if a mandate exists and have sentenced defendants whose offenses took place prior to August 2010 under the new, more equitable, guidelines. However, unless and until the U.S. Supreme Court addresses the inequities of the pre- and post-Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 guidelines, criminal defendants whose cocaine-related offenses occurred prior to August 2010, are more likely than not going to be sentenced under the old, disparate guidelines.

The STHAA would serve to beef up federal laws in order to better ensure that the government has the authority to take punitive action against banks, other financial institutions and even countries that impede the enforcement of American tax laws. Possible penalties could include business embargoes against whole jurisdictions known to purposefully shelter funds away from the prying eyes of U.S. tax authorities.

The ITLEAA takes a very different approach. Instead of penalizing the financial institutions and countries that house the funds, it aims to bring transparency to the people behind-the-scenes at companies that might be hiding money. It would set forth regulations requiring the state of a business' incorporation to collect key identifying information about a company's owners and provide it to law enforcement or tax authorities when subpoenaed.

Senator Levin, the chair of the Senate subcommittee on investments, has stated in the past that abuse of foreign tax havens by American citizens and businesses costs the United States roughly $100 billion in tax revenue annually. In light of the country's ballooning national debt crisis and overall precarious economic situation, he feels that bipartisan support may finally exist for the STHAA and the ITLEAA.

The new Department of Education guidelines also require colleges and universities to:

• Inform students, faculty and staff about anti-discrimination policies
• Name a Title IX overseer to handle discrimination-based complaints coming from students or employees
• Draft procedures and policies to investigate and resolve complaints

The guidelines also present a new standard for how allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault should be handled on campuses across the country: the "more likely than not" standard. This standard is much lower than the traditional criminal standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt," and lower than the previous investigative standard of "highly probable or reasonably certain that the sexual harassment or violence occurred." It is hoped that the standard will lower the rates of criminal sexual-based behavior on school campuses around the country. However, implementation of the lower standard does raise the risk that the standard may be abused and possibly force the accused - even when innocent - to face unwarranted negative consequences before all the facts have come to light.