Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Federal Judiciary Blogs -> U.S. Supreme Court Blog

Federal Judiciary

: U.S. Supreme Court Blog

Gall: Reasonableness Review is Deferential

By Tim Cone

In Gall v. U.S., No. 06-7949 (Dec. 10, 2007), the Supreme Court held that while the extent of the difference between a particular sentence and the recommended Guideline range is relevant, courts of appeal must review all sentences ? whether inside, just outside, or significantly outside the Guidelines range ? under a deferential abuse of discretion standard. The Eighth Circuit therefore erred when it reversed based only on its disagreement with Gall?s sentence. The Court specifically rejected the Eighth Circuit?s view that a variance requires "extraordinary" circumstances, and its application of a proportionality formula to determine whether a Guideline-variance is justified.
The Court noted that the district court committed no procedural error, because it adequately considered the § 3553(a) sentencing factors and adequately explained its sentence. Turning to substantive "reasonableness" review, Court found that the district court "quite reasonably attached great weight" to a number of factors in imposing a below-Guidelines sentence ? Gall?s withdrawal from the conspiracy, his youthful age at the time he committed the offense, and his self-motivated rehabilitation. The Court noted that it is not for courts of appeal to decide de novo whether the justification for a variance is sufficient.

Full post as published by U.S. Supreme Court Blog on December 10, 2007 (boomark / email).