Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Economic crime (2)
- Economics (2)
- Federal sentencing guidelines (2)
- Punishment (2)
- Sentencing guidelines (2)
-
- Crime (1)
- Criminal Law (1)
- Criminal Law Committee (1)
- Criminal Liability (1)
- Criminal law (1)
- Criminal law committee (1)
- Draft (1)
- Due Process of Law (1)
- Economic crime offenders (1)
- Economic crimes (1)
- Federal sentencing policy (1)
- Jurisprudence (1)
- Loss (1)
- Parole commission (1)
- Powers and Duties (1)
- Punitive Damages (1)
- School Personnel (1)
- Searches and Seizures (1)
- Sentences (1)
- Sentencing procedure (1)
- Sententencing (1)
- Students (1)
- Symposium (1)
- U.S. sentencing commission (1)
- United States Constitution 14th Amendment (1)
Articles 1 - 7 of 7
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Supreme Court's Backwards Proportionaility Jurisprudence: Comparing Judicial Review Of Excessive Criminal Punishments And Excessive Punitive Damages Award, Adam M. Gershowitz
The Supreme Court's Backwards Proportionaility Jurisprudence: Comparing Judicial Review Of Excessive Criminal Punishments And Excessive Punitive Damages Award, Adam M. Gershowitz
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.
Editor's Observations: The 2001 Economic Crime Package: A Legislative History, Frank O. Bowman Iii
Editor's Observations: The 2001 Economic Crime Package: A Legislative History, Frank O. Bowman Iii
Faculty Publications
On April 6, 2001, the U.S. Sentencing Commission approved a group of amendments to guidelines governing the sentencing of economic crimes. These measures, collectively known to as the “economic crime package,” are the culmination of some six years of deliberations by both the Conaboy and Murphy Sentencing Commissions working together with interested outside groups such as the defense bar, the Justice Department, probation officers, and the Criminal Law Committee of the U.S. Judicial Conference, The package contains three basic components. First, the now-separate theft and fraud guidelines, Sections 2B1.1 and 2F1.1, will be consolidated into a single guideline. Second, the …
Briefing Paper On Problems In Redefining "Loss" (U.S. Sentencing Commission Economic Crime Symposium), Frank O. Bowman Iii
Briefing Paper On Problems In Redefining "Loss" (U.S. Sentencing Commission Economic Crime Symposium), Frank O. Bowman Iii
Faculty Publications
On October 12-13, 2000, the U.S. Sentencing Commission sponsored its Third Symposium On Crime and Punishment in the United States: Federal Sentencing Policy for Economic Crimes and New Technology Offenses. The afternoon of the first day of the meeting was devoted to discussing the concept of “loss” as a measurement of defendant culpability and offense seriousness. The conferees were divided into small groups to discuss discrete sub-issues relating to “loss” and its place in sentencing economic crimes under the Guidelines. Following the small group discussions, the discussion leaders (“facilitators”) addressed a plenary session of the conference to report on the …
Sentencing Guidelines: Where We Are And How We Got Here (Panel Remarks), Frank O. Bowman Iii
Sentencing Guidelines: Where We Are And How We Got Here (Panel Remarks), Frank O. Bowman Iii
Faculty Publications
The Federal Sentencing Guidelines were created with two broad goals in mind. One, of course, was to reduce unjustified sentencing disparity, and that was accomplished in two ways. The first was to reduce the scope of front-end judicial discretion through the creation of guidelines. The second, which I think Tom Hutchison touched on,1 was to eliminate altogether the discretion of penological experts in the parole commission at the back end of the punishment process.
A Judicious Solution: The Criminal Law Committee Draft Redefinition Of The Loss Concept In Economic Crime Sentencing, Frank O. Bowman Iii
A Judicious Solution: The Criminal Law Committee Draft Redefinition Of The Loss Concept In Economic Crime Sentencing, Frank O. Bowman Iii
Faculty Publications
In December 1999, the United States Sentencing Commission (Commission), an institution that had been in suspended animation for over a year with all seven voting seats vacant, fluttered its eyelids and came back to life. An agreement between the Senate and the White House produced seven new Commissioners: five sitting federal judges, the former General Counsel of the Commission, and a law professor. The new group began work immediately, making itself accessible in meetings with lawyers and judges around the country, exuding an air of intelligence and collegiality, and dispensing in short order with a backlog of amendments to the …
Completing The Sentencing Revolution: Reconsidering Sentencing Procedure In The Guidelines Era, Frank O. Bowman Iii
Completing The Sentencing Revolution: Reconsidering Sentencing Procedure In The Guidelines Era, Frank O. Bowman Iii
Faculty Publications
The central innovation of the guidelines sentencing revolution has been the creation of a regime in which facts other than those required for conviction have necessary consequences at sentencing. In days of yore, judges mulling a sentence were entitled to receive information from virtually any source on virtually any subject, but they were never obliged to pass public judgment on the truth or falsity of what they heard because no finding of fact could constrain their discretion to set a sentence anywhere within the boundaries set by statutory maxima and minima. No more. The project of the original United States …
Public School Officials' Use Of Physical Force As A Fourth Amendment Seizure: Protecting Students From The Constitutional Chasm Between The Fourth And Fourteenth Amendments, Kathryn R. Urbonya
Public School Officials' Use Of Physical Force As A Fourth Amendment Seizure: Protecting Students From The Constitutional Chasm Between The Fourth And Fourteenth Amendments, Kathryn R. Urbonya
Faculty Publications
No abstract provided.