« Come all thee clemencies | Main | More Supreme Court news and speculation »

December 10, 2004

It has to be Booker and Fanfan, no?

Marty Lederman at SCOTUSblog confirms here that the Supreme Court will be issuing an opinion this coming Monday.  Thus, I am going to predict, yet again, that we are only days away from (finally) seeing an opinion in Booker and Fanfan

Though I have already cried wolf more times than the fabled shepard boy, and though the blogsphere has taken to blaming me for decision's delay, I really hope this coming Monday will be the real deal on Booker and Fanfan.  I say that in part because the always-in-the-know SCOTUSblog folks say here that if we do not get the decision this coming Monday, then we will not get it until mid-January.  And I want to believe the High Court is trying its best to render a decision this year.

I have highlighted here and here and here how many different persons and institutions are eager for a decision in Booker and Fanfan.  And it is useful to recall that it has already been nearly five full months since, as detailed here, the US Congress passed a Concurrent Resolution stating "the Supreme Court of the United States should act expeditiously to resolve the current confusion and inconsistency in the Federal criminal justice system by promptly considering and ruling on the constitutionality of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines."

Moreover, there is precedent from last year for the Supreme Court completing a major "rushed" decision in December.  Last year's rushed case was, of course, McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, which dealt with the constitutionality of the new federal campaign finance laws.  The High Court managed to issue its opinions — a total of 298 written pages!! — in that extraordinarily complicated case on December 10, 2003 before its holiday break.  Here's hoping we get another December to remember.

December 10, 2004 at 01:24 PM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference It has to be Booker and Fanfan, no?:


The opinions' clerk said, when I called, that Monday is the last day for opinions before the Court recesses for the year. He also said that they could issue up to four opinions on Monday, but would not say how many they will issue.

Posted by: Mary Price | Dec 10, 2004 1:36:05 PM

I am the wife of an inmate who will be sentenced in February 2, 2005 in Massachusetts. I just want to thank you for keeping us all up to date with Booker and Fanfan decision. I check your website at least 6 times a day. I really hope there is good news to read on Monday. You have done such a GREAT JOB!

Posted by: Yadi | Dec 10, 2004 2:23:23 PM

Hopefully we will hear good news soon. I was convicted in June for mail fraud and depending on how things transpire within the Supreme Court, it could mean a difference of 10 months vs. 51 months under the current guidelines. In the presentencing report, they added to the sentencing actions not proven or even referenced in court but they want to sentence me on those actions. The guidelines have allowed prosecutions to become lazy knowing that if they can get a conviction on one count, sentencing can be based on other related or unrelated issues.

Posted by: Josh | Dec 10, 2004 2:35:42 PM

I want so desperately a December to remember for an incarcerated loved one. He was "buried alive" in the 7th Circuit. He was mentally abused in a way similar to the recent 7th Circuit case of Wilson. My loved one was also the victim of extreme prosecutorial indiscretions.
I have long suspected-but- thanks to Booker/Fanfan and this blog-am certain that the current system and policy allows prosecutors to become ruthless!
His case involves so many elements currently being scruitined like -Enhancements- (obstruction)- Extreme Ineffective Assistance as the original defense attorney was under indictment during the course of trial There are many more "strange" happenings that subsequent teams have attempted to seek justice for. However, as I forsaid he was "Buried Alive". We hope against hope for relief/retroactivity. If you or any courageous compassionate individual can help point us on the right path, he may finally get some relief (he has been in for 13 years, with quite a few remaining).
The Dickens reference was nice but I am looking for the court to vindicate what Langston Hughes wrote. "I, too, sing America.
I am the darker brother.
They send me to eat in the kitchen
when the company comes,
But I laugh
And eat well
And grow strong.

Posted by: Steph | Dec 10, 2004 6:16:33 PM

I am an concern niece , wondering if there is good news on monday, does it apply to my uncle? He's been in prison for about 10 years already.Does Booker vs. FanFan apply to people who are already in prison?

Posted by: Laprell | Dec 23, 2004 2:36:16 PM

How do I get my Husband out on this ruling? He has been in for 13 years and he will fall under this law too!!!

Posted by: Kim Suggs | Apr 13, 2005 4:54:40 PM

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