Sentences with phrase «above guidelines sentences»

The same, for some cosmic reason, won't be true of above guidelines sentences.

In fact, many judges may want to give ABOVE guidelines sentences.

Not exact matches

In a decision important to high - dollar white - collar prosecutions, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals bolstered the broad discretion of trial judges to issue sentences far below, or far above, sentencing guidelines.

The case raises the question of whether a federal judge can reasonably justify an above - guideline sentence based on the local conditions (basics blogged here).

The sentencing guidelines council has issued the following definitive guideline: causing death by careless or inconsiderate driving carries a maximum penalty of five years; causing death by driving, unlicensed, disqualified or uninsured drivers carries a maximum of two years (see tables above for more details).

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Fascinating Second Circuit case reversing above - guideline sentence:

As some may recall (and as detailed in posts here and here), Cavera is the fascinating case in which Judge Sifton decided to enhance a sentence above the guideline range in a gun case because he viewed gun possession in urban spots like NYC to be especially bad.

This suggests that a District Judge of a mind to give a sentence above or below the Guidelines will get the leeway to do so.

A helpful reader made sure I did not miss a fascinating Second Circuit panel decision today reversing an above - guideline sentence as unreasonable in United States v. Singh, No. 16 ‐ 1111 (2d Cir.

The difference would be that on appellate review, rather than reviewing a within - guidelines, presumptively - reasonable sentence, the Court would be reviewing a way - above - guidelines sentence — which of course it could still affirm as substantively reasonable.

As detailed in this webpage (which has links to the briefs in Claiborne here and Rita here), as part of the amicus effort, «NYCDL compiled and analyzed a database of 1,515 post-Booker reasonableness review cases,» which documented «that the courts of appeals have affirmed nearly all within - and above - guidelines sentences while reversing nearly all below - guidelines sentences appealed by the government.»

The Sixth Circuit has a quite thoughtful opinion discussing due process in the retroactive application of the Booker remedy in the course of affirming an above - guideline sentence in US v. Barton, No. 05 - 1229 (6th Cir.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Sixth Circuit thoughtfully discusses due process in affirming above - guideline sentence:

Overall, 79.8 percent of all sentences imposed in FY 2017 were either within the applicable guidelines range, above the range, or below the range at the request of the government.

«A preview of USSC crack retroactivity vote Main Eighth Circuit needs no Gall to affirm above - guideline sentence»

If there are any aggravating — or mitigating — circumstances which might not have been taken into consideration by the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, a federal judge is allowed to impose a sentence which is above or below the guideline range.

Obviously, the same holds true for sentences dramatically above the advisory Guidelines range.

Jan. 7, 2007)(available here), affirms an above - guidelines sentence by relying heavily on Gall.

As many folks recognize, the pro-discretion ruling in Gall does not ensure lighter sentences for everyone: Gall seems to give district courts even more discretion to sentence above the guidelines and should lead circuit courts to review these decisions more deferentially.

Ramirez affirms an above - guideline sentence by relying heavily on Gall.

One (unnamed) commentor assails me for a a lack of «objectivity» because I critique this affirmance of an above - guideline sentence but often praise affirmances of below - guidelines sentences.

Dec. 11, 2007)(available here), highlights that district and circuit courts really did not need Gall to feel comfortable imposing and approving above - guideline sentences.

Mar. 5, 2008)(available here), affirms an above - guideline sentence with heavy reliance on Gall.

A significant note from the Duke Law Journal by Joanna Huang with the above title has been posted today September 29 on the Sentencing Law and Policy blog According to Ms. Huang, ``... in 1987 the United States political and social systems lost trust in the judiciary and severely limited its authority by enacting the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.»

Jan. 10, 2008)(available here), which affirms an above - guidelines sentence by relying heavily on Gall.