October 21, 2005
Of Booker interest from the Circuits
The federal circuit courts have been relatively quiet on the Booker front this week, but at least two decisions issued today merit mention:
From the Fifth Circuit, in US v. Hinson, No. No. 04-10995 (5th Cir. Oct. 21, 2005) (available here), we learn that the defendant "was not entitled to have a jury determine the facts that gave rise to the revocation of her supervised release or the facts that underpin the duration of her sentence upon revocation." In other words, Blakely and Booker do not create Sixth Amendment problems for judicial factfinding in the course of revoking terms of supervised release.
From the Seventh Circuit, in US v. Duncan, No. No. 04-1916 (7th Cir. Oct. 21, 2005) (accessible here), a failure to follow the right procedures in a limited Booker remand lead the court to "take this opportunity to respectfully remind the district court that, upon re-sentencing, it must provide a reasoned explanation for its action so that we are able to fulfill, in due course, our duty to determine whether the sentence is reasonable."
UPDATE: Guideline sentencing fans will also want to be sure to check out the First Circuit's work on various issues in US v. Mateo-Espejo, No. 03-1177 (1st Cir. Oct. 21, 2005)(available here), and the Fourth Circuit's work on substantial assistance departures in US v. Barnette, No. No. 04-4436 (4th Cir. Oct. 21, 2005) (available here).
October 21, 2005 at 02:17 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Of Booker interest from the Circuits: