Read Time: 11 minutes

Former Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin has been sentenced 22 years and six months in prison for murdering George Floyd [State of Minnesota Vs. Derek Michael Chauvin] by a District court, Minnesota.

"He must be held accountable for the death of Mr. Floyd and for doing so in a manner that was particularly cruel an abuse of his authority.... Part of the mission of the Minneapols Police Department is to give citizens "voice and respect". Here, Mr. Chauvin, rather than pursuing his MPD mission treated Mr. Floyd without respect and denied him dignity owed to all human beings and which he certainly would have extended a friend or neighbour. In the Court's view, 270 months, which amounts to an additional 10 years over the presumptive 150-month sentence, is the appropriate sentence"
- Court said.

The killing of Floyd had triggered a massive racial upheaval in the U.S. since the civil rights era, "Black Lives Matter" amid the pandemic.

The punishment culminates questions of official forces using force and delves into the racial discrimination, which inherently prevails in the USA since times immemorial. 

Chauvin was convicted by a jury for the death of Floyd, a 46-year-old Black man. 

"As sentence:

1) The Court commits you to the custody of the Commissioner of Corrections for a period of 270 months. You are granted credit for 199 days already served.

2) Pay the mandatory surcharge of $78 to be paid from prison wages.

3) You are prohibited from possessing firearms, ammunition or explosives for the remainder of your life.

4) Provide a DNA sample as required by law.

5) Register as a predatory offender as required by law.

6) The attached Memorandum opinion is incorporated by reference."

It was on May 25, 2020 when the former police officer Chauvin pinned his knee on Floyd’s neck for 9 minutes and 29 seconds for allegedly dispensing with counterfeit currency. In the videotaped killing, Floyd was seen begging for mercy, till he finally succumbed, gasping for air.

Legal Analysis:

The Court has justified the basis for an aggravated sentencing departure in its analysis because under the law of the State, Guidelines of sentencing promote uniformity, proportionality and predictability in sentencing.

Court said that though a defendant like Chauvin who had zero criminal history points, the presumptive range for a second-degree unintentional murder is 120-180 months, there are two stages that the Court considers, to put forth a sentence which is outside the presumptive range:

1) Factual finding by jury or court that there are more aggravating factors present in the commission of the crime apart from the prima facie elements of the charged crime;

2) The court is also required to explain why the presence of such aggravating factors creates a substantial and compelling reason to impose a sentence outside the presumptive range.

The state had argued 4 aggravating factors. Abuse of a position of trust and authority, treatment of George Floyd with cruelty, presence of children during commission of crime, commission of crime by Chauvin was done with a group.

1. Court found that Chauvin's abuse of a position of trust or authority was a substantial and compelling reason for an upward durational departure under the circumstances of this case.

It was held that, though Chauvin had argued that the aggravating factor of "position of control" did not apply in the present case as it only applied to "criminal sexual conduct, domestic abuse or both, where the victim had a pre-existing relationship with the offender" in terms of the State law, case law demonstrated that this aggravating factor is not limited to cases involving "criminal sexual conduct" or "domestic abuse".

"While perhaps true that observation is unsurprising precisely because successful prosecutions of police officers in Minnesota have been so rare," the court noted, "so long as the relationship between an officer and a victim qualifies as a relationship fraught with power imbalances that may make it difficult for a victim to protect himself or herself," the aggravating factor would apply.

2. Court has found that Mr. Chauvin treating George Floyd with particular cruelty is substantial and compelling reason for an upward durational departure under the circumstances of this case.

Court said that Mr. Chauvin's actions inflicted "gratuitous pain" & the prolonged restraint of Floyd was also much longer and more painful than the typical scenario in a second or third degree murder of second degree manslaughter case.

While disagreeing with Chauvin's argument that there was no particular cruelty as the assault on Floyd occurred in the course of a very short time, Court noted that the conclusion had already been drawn that the assault occurred over an "inordinate amount of time" and that the video evidence at trial coupled with the trial testimony of medical experts called by the State demonstrated that Mr. Chauvin and his fellow officers killed Floyd "slowly", and that the prolonged nature of the asphyxiation was by itself particularly cruel.

"Rather than ending the restraint when it was obvious that Mr. Floyd not only was no longer offering any resistance but was in medical distress and starting CPR, Mr. Chauvin instead chose to continue to restrain Mr. Floyd"
- Court

3. The Court found that the presence of children in this case is not substantial enough and compelling to warrant an upward durational departure from the presumptive sentencing.

4. Court also chose to depart from the factor of commission of crime by a group to base its upward duration of sentencing for Chauvin.