« Will Florida's "mini-Madoff" get a mini version of Madoff's 150-year prison sentence? | Main | Major Mexican drug boss gets 25 years in super-secret federal sentencing »
February 25, 2010
Effective ABA Journal review of Booker at five
Mark Hansen has this effective new piece, headlined "You Say You Want a Revolution: In Booker plus five, there’s been rumbling but hardly rebelling," about federal sentencing life since Booker. Here is how it begins:
Jan. 12 marked the fifth anniversary of U.S. v. Booker, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that some said would revolutionize federal sentencing. The case transformed federal sentencing guidelines from what had long been a mandatory system into an effectively advisory one.
Defense lawyers cheered. District court judges viewed it as sort of an Emancipation Proclamation from the tyranny of the mandatory guidelines. Prosecutors, on the other hand, feared the decision would lead to wildly inconsistent sentences. And some lawmakers worried that it would plunge the courts into “pre-guidelines chaos.”
Five years out, however, Booker has become anything but revolutionary. So far it’s resembled a midfield scrum with either side trying to figure out which way the ball is bouncing.
February 25, 2010 at 07:32 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e20120a8d521a4970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Effective ABA Journal review of Booker at five:
Comments
Just because crime has not increased does not mean that it will not. Nor does it mean that was not the intent of the Supreme Court. Nor does it mean that prosecutors have not offered better plea deals. The deterrence of prosecutors would require a measurement of the harsher plea not offered.
These judges lucked out on other factors suppressing crime at this time, obesity, the feminization of the American male by the feminist lawyer oppressor and its male running dogs, video addiction, cheap apathy generating marijuana, the incredible wealth of the poor from the government transfer of assets from the productive to the parasitic, making any effort to steal and rob just not worth it.
If crime victimization increases again, these judges should be held personally accountable.
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | Feb 26, 2010 12:19:33 AM
