There is no specific book of punishment, as sentencing is based on a variety of factors. Regardless of what crime is committed a criminal lawyer, DUI lawyer or a felony lawyer can provide the client with an average punishment for the situation, but the final judgment is determined by the court.

In most instances, it is the judge and not the jury who determines sentencing. The court cautions elected jurors not to factor possible sentencing when attempting to determine the guilt or innocence of an individual. Certain states require juries to be involved in the sentencing process, but only in rare circumstances, which include advising whether a defendant should receive the death penalty over life imprisonment.

A crime is committed when a specific law has been broken and many times each law or statute provides a guideline for penalties according to each behavior. A first time offender may be subject to a monetary fine, imprisonment or both, which is not to exceed a specific amount. The judge then determines the final penalty. Statutes may define behaviors without delegating punishment so courts will decide the punishment based on the type of behavior in general.

Public complaints of leniency have influenced Congress to ensure justice when certain laws are broken. "Mandatory sentencing" applies when federal crimes are committed and, in certain instances, when a state law is violated. Under these circumstances, judges are required to hand down predetermined punishment for anyone who breaks these specific laws. An automatic and specific punishment is assigned to the breaking of that law regardless of who committed the crime.

Generally, courts expect judges to evaluate a number of facts surrounding the case before determining final punishment. A person's age, criminal history, social and work history in addition to what prompted the individual to break the law and whether he or she regrets the action, are issues taken into consideration. In these situations, the punishment is determined based on the offender and not the law that was broken.

In cases where the judge renders punishment, the defense attorney presents "mitigating circumstances" or facts pertaining to the particular situation, to influence the judge to consider a milder punishment. For instance, it might be taken into consideration that the offender has a minor or no previous criminal history. Perhaps the defendant did not play a key role in the crime, but was assisting another person. Maybe the person was experiencing a great amount of stress when the crime was committed, for example, job loss, bills piling up and a family illness. Or perhaps the crime did not cause injury or would not have resulted in the injury of any person.

On the other hand, "aggravating circumstances" influence a judge to deal severely with an offender. An individual who commits the same crime repeatedly is likely to receive a harsher punishment. How a crime was committed is another aggravating circumstance. An offender who was intentionally cruel or malicious will receive a sentence based upon that behavior. Occasionally, laws carry defining circumstances detailing what is considered aggravating, which include using a weapon to commit a crime.