« Thinking through Kimbrough and the state of crack sentencing | Main | Costs cause states to pursue prison alternatives »

June 17, 2007

Might Congress move ahead with sound sentencing reforms?

In the two-plus years since Booker, Congress has been remarkable quiet on the sentencing front.  Though there have been proposals for large and small sentencing reform from all quarters, Congress has shown relatively little interest in radically changing (or even seriously studying) post-Booker sentencing realities.

As documented here and here at FAMM, however, some members of Congress now appear interested in exploring possible sentencing reforms.  Specifically, later this month brings these two notable congressional events (as described by FAMM):

June 17, 2007 at 09:32 PM | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200e008c71e1d8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Might Congress move ahead with sound sentencing reforms?:

Comments

The Booker case revealed that the 1984 sentencing scheme was responsible for the mandatory/adviseable sentencing guidelines. All prisoners have been sentenced contrary to the intent of the sentencing law, but prisoners cannot get relief due to retroactivity and time restraints. Is this a system that would continue the separation and destruction of homes for the sake of a "possible" flood on the courts if made retroactive? There is a solution, if you want one. Your mandatory laws are draconian! Money spent to continue large term incarcerations can be used for a better transition program. There must be a transition before release. This monster that has been created is full! Children must be reunited with their parents! Taxes must decrease! The public would support a solution for want a securer future, if only you would present one. Yes, they would also support continued incarceration, but only because you fail to offer a better solution. Give the public a choice. I can help.

Posted by: Richard Burk | Jun 26, 2007 10:40:01 AM

I am not an attorney. However, I've practiced post-conviction litigation since 1987, with several successful filings as a Pro Se litigant for other prisoners. I have taught post-conviction for over 10 years. Please add this information to my recent post dated 6-26-07 at 10:40am.

Posted by: Richard Burk | Jun 26, 2007 10:48:40 AM

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