Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Proportionality And Punishment: Double Counting Under The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Gary Swearingen
Proportionality And Punishment: Double Counting Under The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Gary Swearingen
Washington Law Review
The Federal Sentencing Guidelines enhance sentences when the commission of a crime includes certain kinds of egregious conduct. The guidelines define such egregious conduct in a way that allows the sentencing judge to enhance the defendant's sentence twice for the same conduct—once as a "characteristic" of the specific offense for which the defendant is convicted and again under a general "adjustments" section. The federal circuit courts are divided concerning whether the guidelines permit double counting. This Comment examines the courts' differing interpretations of the governing statutes and concludes that the guidelines do not permit double counting unless explicitly stated in …
Death Wish: What Washington Court Should Do When A Capital Defendant Wants To Die, Laura A. Rosenwald
Death Wish: What Washington Court Should Do When A Capital Defendant Wants To Die, Laura A. Rosenwald
Washington Law Review
The Washington Supreme Court held in State v. Dodd that a capital defendant may waive general review of conviction and sentence, and failed to determine whether a defendant may also withhold all mitigating evidence from the sentencing proceeding. The holding limits appellate oversight of death sentences to a degree that fails to ensure Washington's interest in reliable capital punishment. The court should have required general review of both conviction and sentencing in all capital cases. It also should have established a procedure for third-party presentation of mitigating evidence on behalf of capital defendants who insist on withholding such evidence.