May 5, 2006
Getting excited for Cunningham
Though I've not discussed the case in a while, it will soon be time to start getting excited about the Supreme Court's consideration of Cunningham, the California Blakely case. Though Cunnigham won't be argued until the Fall, I believe some of the briefs are due later this month. And, to help gear up for Cunningham mania, Michael O'Hear has written a great little treatment of the case fittingly entitled "Cunningham: The Supreme Court's Next Sentencing Blockbuster?"
Michael has graciously allowed me to post his work, which is available for download below (along with links to prior Cunningham coverage). Among many trenchant observations, Michael makes this point about how Cunningham could impact the Booker fix debate:
Cunningham may effectively impose new constraints on legislative responses to Booker, or, alternatively, point the way for Congress to reinstitute more mandatory guidelines in a constitutional fashion. Most obviously, the central question posed by Cunningham is how discretionary a "discretionary" system needs to be in order to avoid Apprendi problems. In its discussion of this question, the Court may further delineate some of the constitutional parameters within which legislative reformers will have to operate.
Recent related posts:
May 5, 2006 at 06:09 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Getting excited for Cunningham:
"Though Cunningham won't be argued until the Fall, I believe some of the briefs are due later this month."
Cunningham's brief and those of any supporting amici are due Monday, May 8. The state's brief and any supporting amici will be due 35 days later, unless the state also gets an extension (which is common this time of year).
Here is the docket: http://www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/05-6551.htm
Posted by: Kent Scheidegger | May 5, 2006 8:24:27 PM
retired and tda
looking fir info for my brother in federal prison
Posted by: arthur simpson | May 7, 2006 5:53:23 PM