« New (and needed) scholarship on the Armed Career Criminal Act | Main | Prisoners writing to death penalty abolitionists urging end to LWOP advocacy »
February 22, 2010
SCOTUS back to work with a dynamic sentencing docket
As detailed in this Washington Post piece, which is headlined "Supreme Court returns; firearms regulation and detainees on agenda," the Supreme Court Justices return today from their winter hibernation. And, in the baker's dozen of cases to be heard by the Court in the next few weeks, these particular cases should be of particular interesting to sentencing fans (links and descriptions thanks to SCOTUSwiki):
-
United States v. O’Brien and Burgess (trial findings on a weapon that triggers a higher criminal sentence)
-
Carr v. United States (Ex Post Facto Clause application to sex offender registration law)
-
Skilling v. United States (constitutionality and scope of "honest services" fraud law; also, effect of pre-trial publicity)
-
McDonald v. City of Chicago (incorporation of Second Amendment against the states)
Obviously, only the first two of these cases are "pure" sentencing issues, but I suspect lots of sentencing-related concerns could be impacted by expected rulings in the Skilling and McDonald. Also, there are a number of other criminal justice cases being argued in this SCOTUS sitting on issues ranging from Miranda rights to habeas tolling. And, perhaps as early as tomorrow, we might get some opinion in some of the big sentencing cases that were argued during the first half of this SCOTUS Term.
Some recent related posts:
- The 10 biggest cases to watch for sentencing fans in the new SCOTUS term
- SCOTUS starts 2010 with lots of sentencing stories pending
February 22, 2010 at 08:21 AM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e20120a8c2b7da970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference SCOTUS back to work with a dynamic sentencing docket:
Comments
The defendants' briefs in O'Brien and Burgess raise some great issues. These include:
A) a "tail wagging the dog" due process violation argument,
B) what does appellate "reasonableness" review entail (i.e. would a 30 year sentence be "reasonable" without the firearm finding),
C) an as-applied 6th Amend violation under reasonableness review, and
D) whether Harris should be overturned.
Very interesting stuff!
It almost makes me think the Court might want to hold that the type of gun is an element of the offense per Castillo (a statutory interpretation case), just to avoid the other tricky sentencing issues that Defendants have raised.
Posted by: DEJ | Feb 22, 2010 5:13:47 PM
My personal God, I thought you had been going to chip together with some decisive insght by the end there, not let it rest with we allow you to decide.
Posted by: pandora silver charms | Jan 27, 2011 8:43:59 PM