Sentences with phrase «guideline sentence as»

Not long after I saw the Fourth Circuit's Pauley decision upholding a below - guideline sentence as reasonable, I discovered a similar (though split) Eleventh Circuit ruling in US v. McBride, No. 06 - 16544 (11th Cir.

May 12, 2006)(available here), has reversed another below - guideline sentence as unreasonable.

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ninth Circuit reverses within - guideline sentence as substantively unreasonable!!

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.

Nov. 7, 2007)(available here), reveals yet again that some circuits view any within - guideline sentence as essentially per se reasonable.

Not exact matches

He was sentenced to life in prison last month, though federal guidelines stated he could have served as few as twenty years.

Now you can either take that as a guideline to conduct yourself with manners and not stealing or you can turn this around and make this sentence a bad thing to hurt people who have faith.

As of 1 February, new guidelines * in England and Wales mean food industry professionals face possible custodial sentences for actions deemed to have caused harm or risk of harm to consumers.

Davis notes that in spite of a CBA that occupies 316 pages of mostly single - spaced sentences, the NFL has not bargained for «anything regarding dating, contacting or fraternizing cheerleaders or anyone» or for «any rules or guidelines for social media, posting or appearances other than as it relates to promoting products.»

The proceedings are scheduled to get underway momentarily, and could go on for some time, I'm told, as there are going to be discussions and motions made about the sentencing guidelines, over which there is some confusion.

Indeed they deny that cannabis has any medicinal value, despite the licence granted to GW Pharmaceuticals and despite the recognition of it as mitigation in the sentencing guidelines.

I assisted as a volunteer to a friend who had been charged with a federal crime, by actually READING the United States Sentencing Guidelines (USSG)-- I recommend the exercise.

More cases will be pursued and tougher sentences sought by sending suspects straight to Crown Court, Keir Starmer, QC, will say as he sets out new guidelines for the Crown Prosecution Service... The move comes amid a general government crackdown on benefit fraud.

«As a result of these changes to the guidelines, we are hopeful that more judges will feel able to refer people who are dependent on drugs for treatment as part of a sentence for a drug - related offencAs a result of these changes to the guidelines, we are hopeful that more judges will feel able to refer people who are dependent on drugs for treatment as part of a sentence for a drug - related offencas part of a sentence for a drug - related offence.

The new figures, released to us by the Sentencing Guidelines Council, expose the myth that Asbos are being used as a stand - alone, preventative tool to protect the public from repeat and serious antisocial behaviour.

Not just New Labour's overwhelming desire to amass all sorts of information about the individual and New Labour's managerial model of how to govern but also, in particular, a steady shift away from «justice» and towards «control»: towards the arbitrary, unconstrained use of power through the regular invocation of states of exception (terror legislation and Iceland is in this category); the creation of catch - all legislation whose operational interpretation is at the whim of the police (photography, questioning individual police officers); government attempts to constrain the judiciary through tick - the - box sentencing guidelines, and at an individual level examples such as David Milliband's quite disgraceful prevarication over torture allegations.

Silver's lawyers maintain in their sentencing memo that Manhattan Federal Judge Valerie Caproni should consider «a term of rigorous community service — whether as an alternative to incarceration, or as a component of an appropriate below - guidelines sentence» due to his age and poor health.

There's a long list of steps being taken: a new offence of possessing «paedophilic manuals»; a strengthening of sentencing guidelines for computer hacking operations; new powers to seize and destroy chemical substances suspected of being used as cutting agents for illegal drugs.

Judge Valerie Caproni described a term of around 22 to 27 years, per sentencing guidelines, as «draconian and unjust» given Silver's age, according to the New York Times.

As with every other aspect of sentencing, one would expect the Lord Chief Justice, senior judges and the Supreme Court to issue sentencing guidelines.

U.S. District Senior Judge Thomas J. McAvoy will rely on federal sentencing guidelines if he sentences Scarborough, and must publicly state his justifications if he sentences the lawmaker to less or more time than are called for in the guidelines, which take into account factors such as a defendant's criminal history and acceptance of responsibility for their crimes.

They then write a summarizing sentence to be used as a guideline in creating the levels.

Gertner says judges are too often silent on issues they should publicly address, such as how federal sentencing guidelines have led to what she and other jurists consider unreasonably long prison terms for nonviolent drug offenders.

If sentencing guidelines allow for consideration of prior bad acts, why not prior «good acts» as well?

The compliance plan itself will provide detail in the seven areas of an effective compliance program as set forth in the Federal Sentencing Guidelines.

July 20, 2007)(available here), the DC Circuit has to vacate and remand a sentence because «the record is muddled as to whether the district court considered [a particular guideline range as the] starting point for its analysis.»

I wonder if we're going to see another strong press to demand guideline range sentences as if Rita declared that district courts must apply a presumption that the guidelines sentence should be used.

One of the elements required by the Federal Sentencing Guidelines and described in all of the OIG industry specific Compliance Guidelines is that the Compliance Program include a mechanism to deal with compliance problems as they are discovered.

As long as the sentence is not such that, without some evidence the judge found but the jury did not, it is outside the range specified by statute, can't the judge pretty much sentence however he wants, whether he wants to be a hardass or skeptic regarding the GuidelineAs long as the sentence is not such that, without some evidence the judge found but the jury did not, it is outside the range specified by statute, can't the judge pretty much sentence however he wants, whether he wants to be a hardass or skeptic regarding the Guidelineas the sentence is not such that, without some evidence the judge found but the jury did not, it is outside the range specified by statute, can't the judge pretty much sentence however he wants, whether he wants to be a hardass or skeptic regarding the Guidelines?

I suppose that, the Honorable Sim Lake, as a committee chair for the US Sentencing Commission, is allowing his personal allegience to the claimed «reasonableness» of the Sentencing guidelines and his personal interest in supporting his own previous ruling of «loss» in this case is getting in the way of his duty to be a judge (rather than the head of the prosecution team in this specific matter).

But, on the other hand, and perhaps even more importantly as a practical matter, the opinion for the Court in Rita suggests that at least some within - guideline sentences in some cases have to be, at some point, found unreasonable by circuit courts.

As Souter points out, though, to call this an «appellate presumption» is to turn a blind eye to the fact that the trial courts are all keenly aware of what their Court of Appeals is looking for — a within - Guidelines sentence.

But still, and perhaps even more importantly as a practical matter, the opinion for the Court suggests it is quite possible to make the argument that a particular «Guidelines sentence itself fails properly to reflect § 3553 (a) considerations» and that «the sentencing court does not enjoy the benefit of a legal presumption that the Guidelines sentence should apply.»

Can someone explain the meaning of this sentence on page 14 of the majority opinion: «As far as the law is concerned, the judge could disregard the Guidelines and apply the same sentence (higher than the statutory minimum or the bottom of the unenhanced Guidelines range) in the absence of the special facts (say, gun brandishing) which, in the view of the Sentencing Commission, would warrant a higher sentence within the statutorily permissible range.&raquAs far as the law is concerned, the judge could disregard the Guidelines and apply the same sentence (higher than the statutory minimum or the bottom of the unenhanced Guidelines range) in the absence of the special facts (say, gun brandishing) which, in the view of the Sentencing Commission, would warrant a higher sentence within the statutorily permissible range.&raquas the law is concerned, the judge could disregard the Guidelines and apply the same sentence (higher than the statutory minimum or the bottom of the unenhanced Guidelines range) in the absence of the special facts (say, gun brandishing) which, in the view of the Sentencing Commission, would warrant a higher sentence within the statutorily permissible range.»

Any point total over 44 points means that a state prison sentence must be imposed unless the prosecutors agree or the judge chooses to depart below the mandatory prison term as called for by legal guidelines.

The 11th Circuit recently upheld his sentence as appropriate under today's harsh federal sentencing guidelines.

So instead of carrying around the bound volumes of the Crimes Code, Rules of Criminal Procedure, and Sentencing Guidelines, I have them all available as searchable.

There was agreement, that the system's total failure to collect information as to whether sentencing guidelines are being followed has to be corrected.

As a result, some lawyers and compliance experts began to question whether creating a «dual role» compliance officer put the organization at risk of not receiving the benefits afforded under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines if the organization was ever in a position to need these benefits.

For instance, is it clear that resentencing will be under Booker, with revisitation of all guideline findings that went into the original sentence, or will resentencing be limited to the change introduced by the amendment as though it existed at the time of original sentencing (even if the original sentencing was pre-Booker)?

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 baAs 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 baas 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.

As I have stressed repeatedly before (most recently here), the US Sentencing Commission has said officially, repeatedly and emphatically that the current crack guidelines are too harsh and thus «significantly undermine -LSB--RSB- the various congressional objectives set forth in the Sentencing Reform Act.»

Moreover, and perhaps even more disturbing, neither the district court or the Eighth Circuit panel explained why they view as «sufficient but not greater than necessary» for Otterson a prison sentence of 235 months (at the top of the applicable guideline range), instead of a sentence of, say, 188 months (at the bottom of the range).

As hinted in this account, Lord Black got the benefit of very favorable guideline rulings at the outset of his sentencing and they got a sentence at the bottom of the calculated guideline range.

As I stressed in this post (and other insightful folks have also noted here and here), the Supreme Court's Rita decision seems to approve a guideline - centric approach to post-Booker sentencing, but also seems to condone any reasoned decision by lower courts to take other approaches to post-Booker sentencing law and procedure.

Adding all this up — and again keeping in mind the USSC's own official, repeated and emphatic assertions that the crack guidelines are «greater than necessary» to achieve serve § 3553 (a)-- shouldn't a circuit court view a within - guideline crack sentences as presumptively unreasonable?

As I first noted here, the Supreme Court's decision in Rita upholds the Fourth Circuit's decision to adopt a presumption of reasonableness for within - guideline sentences, but also indirectly approves of other circuits» decisions to resist adopting this presumption.

Instead, as a quick review of Congress's express commands in section 3553 (a) of the Sentencing Reform Act makes clear, Congress told judges to «impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with» the traditional purposes of sentencing (while also considering various relevant facts and factors including the guSentencing Reform Act makes clear, Congress told judges to «impose a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary, to comply with» the traditional purposes of sentencing (while also considering various relevant facts and factors including the gusentencing (while also considering various relevant facts and factors including the guidelines).

Federal sentencing fanatics know that the Paul case in the Ninth Circuit is significant because it was arguably the first (and might still be considered the only) circuit ruling that a within - guideline sentence should be reversed as substantively unreasonable.

Another impetus for the Sentencing Council to produce these new guidelines was the recognition of legal developments such as: