Life in the fast-track lane

A couple of recent circuit rulings have discussed fast-track and disparity issues post-Booker.  On Thursday, the Seventh Circuit in US v. Martinez-Martinez, No. 05-2713 (7th Cir. Mar. 23, 2006) (available here), rejected a defendant's claim that fast-track disparities made a within-guideline sentence unreasonable.  The ruling in Martinez-Martinez hints, by citing some First Circuit dicta, that a departure or variance based on fast-track disparity might be unreasonable, but this important issue is ultimately left unresolved.

Similarly, as covered here at the Second Circuit Sentencing Blog, the Second Circuit has recently flirted with this issue.  In US v. Urena, No. 05-2343 (2d Cir. Mar. 22, 2006) (available here), the court in a summary order flags, but does not resolve, "whether a sentencing court can, should, or must consider the wide-spread use of fast-track programs as a factor relevant to an individual defendant's sentence."