« Continuing capital commotion | Main | Simon says offender characteristics now quite relevant to federal sentencing »

February 8, 2005

Booker wisdom for the states from the Vera Institute

The Vera Institute of Justice — which has been at the forefront of state sentencing reform through its State Sentencing and Corrections Program (SSC) — was at the forefront of covering the impact of Blakely in the states through its publications entitled "Aggravated Sentencing: Blakely v. Washington — Practical Implications for State Systems" (discussed and linked here) and "Aggravated Sentencing: Blakely v. Washington — Legal Considerations for State Systems" (discussed and linked here).

Achieving a state trifecta, the Vera Institute now has produced "Beyond Blakely: Implications of the Booker Decision for State Sentencing Systems."  Authored by Jon Wool, this terrific state-focused account of Booker can be accessed here.  These opening paragraphs provide a fitting overview:

The Supreme Court's recent decision in United States v. Booker has transformed sentencing for federal judges, prosecutors, and defense attorneys.  But what guidance does it offer state policymakers and practitioners?  The short answer: not much.

The Booker decision addresses only a few of the many questions raised by the Court's earlier ruling in Blakely v. Washington, which directly and dramatically affected the sentencing systems in a number of states. For those in the states who are struggling with these questions, Booker's 118 pages and six opinions offer little clarity. Nonetheless, the Booker decision sheds some light on the Blakely rule and sharpens its implications for certain states' structured sentencing systems.

February 8, 2005 at 05:11 PM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Booker wisdom for the states from the Vera Institute:


As an interested observer of the federal court system, I want to know how the 5th Circuit is handling the revoking of sentences by the Supremem Court and the remanding the cases back to the Circuit courts. Is this simply a pass-through to the various US Atty offices for re-sentencing? Negotiating penalties never presented in trial? Removing points above the minimum because nothing was presented in trial? What is going on?

Posted by: Katherine Mize | Feb 16, 2005 10:02:12 PM

I am a paralegal student. I am wondering
how this decision has affected New Jersey
cases in particular. Have any cases been returned to the courts for re sentencing
here or is this only being done on a
Federal level?

Posted by: Gesele | Sep 18, 2005 11:55:38 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