March 19, 2013
"Fun with Numbers: Gall's Mixed Message Regarding Variance Calculations"The title of this post is the title of this notable new student note by Nicholas Deuschle now available via SSRN. Here is the abstract:
This Comment seeks to resolve an unaddressed issue stemming from recent developments in the Supreme Court’s sentencing jurisprudence. In Gall v. United States, the Supreme Court required that appellate courts "consider the extent of the deviation" of criminal sentences imposed outside the Sentencing Guidelines range. The Court, however, provided little guidance as to what this requirement means. Specifically, how should appellate courts calculate that deviation from the Sentencing Guidelines?
March 19, 2013 at 09:32 AM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Fun with Numbers: Gall's Mixed Message Regarding Variance Calculations":
Interestingly , albeit Due Process and Crimes Against Humanity issues ; as I recall, the Third Reich had promulgated legislation which permitted summary punishment were the police to catch a transgressor in the act or red-handed .
Probably saved substantial time and Deutch marks re grand jury , trials , appeals , etc.
I have forgotten whether our (Chief Justice - on leave) Robert Jackson fussed specifically about that law.
Posted by: Anon. #2.71828 | Mar 19, 2013 9:41:29 AM