« Booker in the papers | Main | Judge Paul Cassell speaks first again!! »
January 14, 2005
A day late and a Booker short
The Eighth Circuit wins the award for having on-line the first federal ruling discussing Blakely that I could find after Booker was handed down. However, even though US v. Walker, 2005 WL 66272 (8th Cir. Jan. 13, 2005), is dated Thursday, Jan. 13 (the day after Booker changed the federal sentencing world on Wednesday January 12), the Eighth Circuit in a footnote in Walker says:
Walker has requested leave to file a supplemental brief on the applicability of Blakely v. Washington, 124 S.Ct. 2531 (2004), which we have denied. However, we reserve ruling on the applicability of the Blakely reasoning to this case until the Supreme Court issues its opinions in United States v. Booker and United States v. Fanfan.
Of course, the Eighth Circuit should not be criticized for this quirk of timing; the Supreme Court itself showed us quite clearly through Booker that federal justice often moves more slowly than we might hope.
On a more serious front, I am eager to see when and how lower federal courts around the country start dealing with Booker in written opinions. I hope to be able to share and analyze these opinions as soon as they are available.
January 14, 2005 at 09:49 AM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e200d834392f9e53ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A day late and a Booker short:
Comments
The Seventh Circuit also issued an opinion on January 13 which addresses Booker. The court remannded for re-sentencing on non-Booker grounds and then noted, "We therefore remand the case to the district court for resentencing on count one in accordance with the Supreme Court's latest pronouncement on the effect, if any, of Blakely and Booker on the federal sentencing guidelines." The opinion was obviously drafted ahead of the Supreme Court's decision, but used this language to account for the decision, whatever it may have turned out to be.
Posted by: Jonathan | Jan 14, 2005 10:03:15 AM
The case, by the way, is U.S. v. Cummings, (7th Cir., January 13, 2004; No. 03-2660.
Posted by: Jonathan | Jan 14, 2005 10:04:23 AM
Does the Blakely case apply in the 9th Ciruit
District Court? My husbands last appeal, in
the 9th Circuit District Court, was denied.
Is there any way I can use the Blakely case
to help him? I'm sorry for so many questions,
I just want to do anything I can to get him
released or his sentence reduced.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Teresa Mainor
Posted by: Teresa Mainor | Feb 13, 2005 2:27:09 PM
