Amicus brief on Booker sentencing and review

As detailed in this post, earlier this month there was an en banc argument in two First Circuit cases concerning the standards for post-Booker sentencing and appellate review, and I am hoping that the First Circuit recognizes the troubling aspects of a "presumption of reasonableness" for within-guideline sentences.  As documented by the amazing amicus brief filed by the NACDL in the First Circuit (which is available for download below), others are likewise calling on the First Circuit to take a different path than other circuits have.

UPDATE:  Thanks to a helpful reader, I can now provide copies of both the NACDL's amicus brief and an amicus brief filed by the federal public defenders in the First Circuit.  (I will happily also post the government's brief if someone can send me an electronic copy.)

Download nacdl_1st_cir_amicus.PDF

Download fpd_1st_cir_amicus.pdf

MORE: Thansk to another hepful reader, I can now provide a copy of the Government's brief in the First Circuit: Download government_1st_cir_en_banc_brief.rtf

Related reasonableness posts:

• Reasonableness review round-up . . . calling Justice Scalia
• Why a "presumption of reasonableness" is troubling
• The ugly look of reasonableness review
• Reasonable complaints about reasonableness review

MORE:  At Appellate Law & Practice, S. COTUS adds this great line to all the serious debate over reasonableness review:

"Presumption of Reasonableness" is beginning to sound like the name of a "Law and Order" which, apparently, is a TV show watched by non-lawyers in which prosecutors are saints and fight crime or something.