The main questions arise: What can justify and give this right to the State to impose formal and legal punishment on those who commit criminal crimes? It is important to note that other punishments have their impact on society. However, my research concerns state punishments. So I will avoid traditional punishments such as religious, family or any other particular group. The state's legal system is responsible for controlling and preventing the other punishments I have stated. Punishments are understood as undesirable and concern something done by the punished person or at least, erroneously or indirectly, imputed to him. What was done must be due to something illicit. It can be morally or socially wrong. Furthermore, it may be a misbehavior prohibited by law, convention or other rules. You cannot punish someone for nothing, the convicted person must be involved in a crime to be punished and must rely on some evidence to implement his punishment. Each country has different laws, some have very harsh sentences and others have a softer approach. Punishment can vary depending on the level of the crime and the damage done. The police force enforces the law and the judicial system delivers the verdict. I will now turn to some arguments in support of these charges with reference to state punishment. All countries in the world that practice a mixed theory of punishment, including utilitarian, deterrent and reformative, for example in the United States constitute a federal system, each state has its own sovereign system, a state constitution and a state judicial system. Some states practice capital punishment, others do not, according to statistics released by the Federal Bureau