Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Criminal Law Blogs -> Sentencing Law and Policy

Criminal Law

: Sentencing Law and Policy

Ninth Circuit discusses consideration of state-federal disparities after Booker

By Douglas A. Berman

In a narrow little opinion today in US v. Ringgold, No. 06-10492 (9th Cir. July 7, 2009) (available here), the Ninth Circuit discusses the consideration of state-federal disparities after Booker.  Here is how the opinion starts: This appeal concerns the question whether, after United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), a district court abuses its discretion by declining to consider the disparity between a recommended Guidelines sentence and the maximum sentence a defendant would receive if convicted of the same conduct in state court.  Under the circumstances presented by this case, we hold that the district court did not abuse its discretion or commit procedural error in declining to consider such a disparity.  Additionally, we hold that the sentence imposed by the district court was not substantively unreasonable...continue to full post

Full post as published by Sentencing Law and Policy on July 07, 2009 (boomark / email).