« Nuanced and astute (and vague) testimony from DOJ at Sentencing Commission hearing on mandatory minimums | Main | Fourth Circuit rules that Ex Post Facto Clause still limits application of new advisory guidelines »
May 27, 2010
Two notable federal sentencing pieces in the latest BC Law Review
Thanks to this post at Concurring Opinions, I see that the May 2010 issue of the Boston College Law Review has a student note and an article by a federal defender that should be of special interest for modern federal sentencing fans. Here are the titles and links to these two pieces:
- Alexandra W. Reimelt, An Unjust Bargain: Plea Bargains and Waiver of the Right to Appeal, 51 B.C. L. Rev. 871 (2010) [PDF]
- Doug Keller, Why the Prior Conviction Sentencing Enhancements in Illegal Re-Entry Cases Are Unjust and Unjustified (and Unreasonable Too), 51 B.C. L. Rev. 719 (2010) [PDF]
May 27, 2010 at 12:58 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451574769e20133eee7762f970b
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Two notable federal sentencing pieces in the latest BC Law Review:
Comments
In what way is stacking an enhancement on illegal re-entry unjust? It seems like the perfect sort of recidivist enhancement to me. What more proof of someone's intent to flout the law do you need?
I can somewhat understand the folks who think we need open borders, though I think they are very wrong. I do not understand at all the impulse some have for not punishing those who insist on repeatedly breaking the law. Do we really wish to sink to the point of nicely asking criminals to stop and when they don't we'll ask them again?
Posted by: Soronel Haetir | May 27, 2010 1:08:06 PM
Bill? Well?
Posted by: Supremacy Claus | May 27, 2010 8:28:56 PM
The 16 level enhancement makes illegal re-entry subject to the same sentence as for sex trafficking children and using an explosive device in an airport or airplane. This is ridiculous. Mr. Keller makes it clear that some recidivist enhancement might be more appropriate, but the current state of the guideline along with its lack of justifcation by the commission make it an abberation that doesnt make sense. You and I sitting down together could come up with a better guideline in 15 minutes.
Posted by: KRG def attny | May 28, 2010 2:27:21 PM
I knew Alexandra W. Reimelt :) He's my sister-in-law, she was a good Lawyer on her time :)
Posted by: Adult toys | Jun 1, 2010 11:06:19 AM
