Federal Judiciary

Supreme Court Accepts Two Cases For Booker Reasonableness Review
The Supreme Court granted certiorari in the following two cases:Rita v. US, No. 06-5754 (presumption of reasonableness for within guideline sentence; from 4th Cir.):1) Was the district court's choice of within-Guidelines sentence reasonable?2) In making that determination, is it consistent with United States v...

Rita Fallout
In U.S. v. McGee, No. 06-1554 (6th Cir. 7/11/07) Judge McKeague writes, "Finally, Appellant argues that the presumption of reasonableness applicable to a sentence within the Guidelines range 'is not necessarily the appropriate way to review sentences,' and he asks us 'to reconsider its standard of review and to better define what a criminal defendant must do to rebut the presumption of reasonableness...

Tenth Circuit splits over reasonableness of below-guideline sentence
In a lengthy decision, a split Tenth Circuit panel upheld the reasonableness of a below-guideline sentence in a sex offense case in US v. Smart, No. No. 06-6120 (10th Cir. Mar. 4, 2008)(available here)...

No Error Where Distrcict Court Doesn't Know Whether Guidelines Are Still Mandatory
US v. Go: Go was a gopher in a methamphetamine distribution conspiracy. For his role in the offense - mostly running errands related to the conspiracy in return for methamphetamine - he was convicted after a jury trial of conspiracy to distribute more than 50 grams of methamphetamine...

Looooong Second Circuit ruling finds below-guideline sentences unreasonable
In a long opinion that discusses Booker and Gall at length, the Second Circuit today in US v. Cutler, No. 05-2516 (2d Cir. Mar. 17, 2008) (available here), reverses a pair of below-guideline sentences as both procedurally and substantively unreasonable...

100:1 Crack/powder ratio: Cannot replace ratio, but can vary from GL based on case-specific reasons
In US v. Ricks, Nos. 05-4832, 4833 (3d Cir. 7/20/07), the Circuit followed its prior decision in US v. Gunter, 462 F.3d 237 (3d Cir. 2006), in ruling that although a district court can consider the 100:1 crack/powder differential in the guidelines and find the differential is "too vast," it may not categorically reject the ratio and substitute its own...