« More guidance from the 9th Circuit | Main | Still more on the prior conviction exception »

August 28, 2004

Blakely back in the news

The coming week should have plenty of Blakely news with the Solicitor General's office and the US Sentencing Commission both due to submit briefs in the Booker and Fanfan cases on Wednesday. In the meantime, the newspapers are again finding other noteworthy Blakely stories.

From Tennessee articles here and here report on the recommendation made by the Task Force appointed by Governor Phil Bredesen that a special session of the Tennessee General Assembly is not needed to deal with Blakely. Background on the Tennessee Task Force can be found here and here, and this recent news article thoughtfully explains why the "Task force on sentencing has its work cut out for it." This article also details the variations in Tennessee sentencing practices in the wake of Blakely:

[Cleveland attorney James F.] Logan said some judges are ignoring Blakely. Others, he said, insist it mandates only minimum sentences, ignoring even prior convictions that the nation's high court clearly said could be used to boost sentences. At least two judges are now holding separate sentencing hearings, allowing juries to decide which factors a judge can use, if any, to ratchet up a criminal's sentence. They are doing so even though there is no law on the books that allows that process, known as a bifurcated hearing, in any case other than those in which the death penalty or life without parole is sought as punishment.

In other state news, this article discusses a peculiar ruling from a Michigan state judge who apparently declared Michigan's state sentencing guidelines unconstitutional in order to be able to sentence a child molester to a much longer prison sentence than the guidelines provided.

From the federal desk come two Blakely stories out of the Eighth Circuit. This article discusses a factually and legally interesting case involving a former Kansas City pharmacist who received a 30-year prison term for diluting chemotherapy drugs. And this article discusses a North Dakota perjury case in which all parties agreed to put sentencing on hold until November 10 with the hope that federal sentencing law will be clearer at that time.

August 28, 2004 at 09:20 AM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200d834d3117969e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Blakely back in the news:

Comments

I am interested in the Blakley Law because I am raising the children of woman who is incarcerated and the sentence is absolutely ridiculous. Her only hope is with this law. I don't know much about it but my attorney who works for the State for Michigan. (she is actually my friend) is looking into this law to see if will help her in her appeal.) Her office is located in lansing Michigan.

Lori Kolar

Posted by: Lori Kolar | Jul 6, 2006 1:16:05 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB