Now showing items 1-6 of 6
Judicial Oversight of Negotiated Sentences in a World of Bargained Punishment
(Stanford Law Review, 2005)
Prosecutors control statutory ranges by selecting charges. In addition, prosecutors decide whether to use or forego special sentencing statutes that carry mandatory minimum penalties higher than the maximum Guidelines ...
"Apprendi" and Plea Bargaining
(Stanford Law Review, 2001)
Before "Apprendi", prosecutors using recidivism as a club could, and did, regularly insist that defendants admit aggravating facts as part of the plea or face additional time. When the prosecutor's threats of added time ...
How Different is Death? Jury Sentencing in Capital and Non-Capital Cases Compared
(Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law, 2004)
Drawing upon a recent study of felony jury sentencing in Kentucky, Virginia, and Arkansas, this essay highlights some of the similarities and differences between jury sentencing in capital cases and jury sentencing in ...
(Federal Sentencing Reporter, 2004)
Federal criminal sentencing in the wake of Blakely v. Washington is, to put it charitably, a mess. In holding that Blakely's sentence under the Washington State Sentencing Guidelines was imposed in a manner inconsistent ...
(Federal Sentencing Reporter, 2000)
The Court in Apprendi v. New Jersey, ___ U.S. ___ (2000), held as a matter of due process that any fact, other than a prior conviction, that increases the penalty for an offense beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must ...
Reasonableness Review After Booker
(Houston Law Review, 2006)
About a year ago, the Supreme Court in United States v. Booker declared a new standard for the appellate review of federal sentences-reasonableness. Justice Breyer, writing for the Court, asserted reassuringly that the ...