Search Results for Kimbrough

...Harry Sandick © The Ohio State University Gall and Kimbrough and Their Relevance to Sentencing in White-Collar Cases I. Introduction Ever since United States v. Booker,1 there has been considerable uncertainty about whether that decision made the Federal Sentencing Guidelines truly advisory...

...Laura I. Appleman © The Ohio State University Toward a Common Law of Sentencing: Gall, Kimbrough, and the Search for Reasonableness They sought it with thimbles, they sought it with care; They pursued it with forks and hope; They threatened its life with a railway-share; They charmed...

...Lex A. Coleman Abstract The 1984 Sentencing Reform Act charged the U.S. Sentencing Commission with developing sentencing guidelines that advanced the purposes of sentencing under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). After the Supreme Court cases Booker , Kimbrough , Gall , and Spears , it is now well established...

... pornography. This short commentary explains how the state of federal sentencing after Booker is particularly hospitable to arguments for sentencing leniency for defendants convicted of possessing child pornography. One argument calls on a district court to use its sentencing policy discretion under Kimbrough...

... the standard of review hardly seems consistent with a rule of law regime that treats similarly situated individuals similarly. III. Kimbrough v. United States Of all the Court s post-Booker decisions, Kimbrough v. United States16 most deeply reveals the tension the Court faces between discretion and uniformity...

... starting with Apprendi v. New Jersey,1 running through Booker v. United States,2 and ending in Gall v. United States3 and Kimbrough v. United States,4 the Supreme Court killed off determinate sentencing. These decisions rendered the Guidelines advisory only 5 and made clear that appellate review...

.... The question in Kimbrough was whether a district court had discretion to deviate from the crack cocaine guideline based on the disparity in the Guidelines treatment of crack and powder cocaine. The government contended that the crack Guidelines were binding on judges because they were the product...

... the matrix of the Guidelines tables. In Kimbrough v. United States3 and Gall v. United States,4 the Supreme Court addressed well-known criticisms of the way the Guidelines mete out punishment to narcotics offenders by focusing on the type and quantity of the drug at issue. The cases are also relevant...

... sometimes noted the fact that Congress had retained a role in guideline sentencing but carefully avoided the issue of just how much deference was due a congressionally mandated guideline. That issue became even more important when the Court decided in Kimbrough that district courts had the discretion...

... similar Black and White men has nearly quadrupled: from 4.5 percent before Booker, to 15 percent after it, to 19.5 percent after United States v. Kimbrough and United States v. Gall.1 The Commission further claims that interjudge disparity has increased in two-thirds of the federal districts...

... on the effects of United States v. Booker makes a number of very worrisome claims. The most alarming is that the gap in sentences between otherwise similar Black and White men has nearly quadrupled: from 4.5 percent before Booker, to 15 percent after it, to 19.5 percent after United States v. Kimbrough...

..., 2006 (approximately 18 months) 4. Post-Booker II: July 1, 2006 December 9, 2007 (approximately 17 months) 5. Kimbrough/Gall: December 10, 2007 September 30, 2008 (approximately 10 months) These periods track the key statutory changes and Supreme Court decisions between October 2001 and September 2008...

... of the Commission and its capacity both to address congressional errors of judgment and to correct its own mistakes in crack and other areas. In Kimbrough v. United States,9 the Supreme Court described how the overly general and mechanical application of a congressional ratio to all offenders and all offense levels...

...), the Court will grant each defendant a downward variance of two levels3 from the sentence otherwise appropriate in his or her case. I. Under Kimbrough, the Court May Consider Changes In State Law and Federal Enforcement Policy Regarding Marijuana as it Weighs § 3553(A) Sentencing Factors In Kimbrough v...

... information: httpwww.ussc.gov. DOI: fsr.2008.21.1.39. UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION September 2008 FEDERAL SENTENCING REPORTER VOL. 21, NO. 1 OCTOBER 2008 39 Table 1 COMPARISON OF SENTENCE IMPOSED AND POSITION RELATIVE TO THE GUIDELINE RANGE1 Fiscal Year 2005, Post-Booker - 2008, Kimbrough/Gall...

... courts concerning the justifications for a sentence outside of the advisory Guideline range. And, in Kimbrough v. United States, the Court has a crack case that should allow the Justices to address these matters specifically in the context of cocaine sentencing law and policy. In Kimbrough...

... times in this category of cases) and General guideline adequacy issues (cited 87 times), judges rarely indicate anything speci c about the Guidelines to help explain why they chose to sentence below the recommended Guidelines range. Booker was followed by other cases, notably Rita6 and Kimbrough...

.... 1. The Role of Loss The first type of criticism challenges the central role that loss plays in Guideline determinations. As Harry Sandick explains, the Supreme Court s decisions in Gall and Kimbrough now open the door to sweeping, policy-based challenges to the Guidelines approach to loss. Just...

... of punishment as outlined by Congress. While the U.S.S.C., and many appellate courts, continued to treat the Guidelines as presumptive and even nearly fully mandatory, by 2007 when the Court ruled in both Gall v. United States14 and Kimbrough v. United States,15 it became clear that the Court meant...

... of Sentences Below or Above Guideline Range, FY 2004 2010 100 80 60 Booker 40 20 0 Within Range Kimbrough/Gall Government Sponsored Below Range Below Range Above Range FY2010 FY2009 FY2008 FY2007 FY2006 FY2005 Source: U.S.S.C., Fourth Quarter 2010 Preliminary Quarterly Data Report, fig. A before the judge...