Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 4 of 4
Full-Text Articles in Judges
Unclear Guidelines From The Sentencing Commission And A Prejudiced Warden Result In (Un)Compassionate Release, Mary Trotter
Unclear Guidelines From The Sentencing Commission And A Prejudiced Warden Result In (Un)Compassionate Release, Mary Trotter
Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary
Congress first developed compassionate release in 1984, granting federal courts the authority to reduce sentences for “extraordinary and compelling” reasons. Compassionate release allows the Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and inmates to apply for immediate early release on grounds of “particularly extraordinary or compelling circumstances which could not reasonably have been foreseen by the court at the time of sentencing.” Questions remain about how the BOP and the courts grant compassionate release and whether the courts apply the compassionate release guidelines consistently. The uncertainty is due to the lack of clarity from the USSC to define “extraordinary or compelling circumstances,” …
Distinguishing Starfish From Cobras: The Importance Of Discretion For The Juvenile Judge In Fitness Hearings, Socrates Peter Manoukian
Distinguishing Starfish From Cobras: The Importance Of Discretion For The Juvenile Judge In Fitness Hearings, Socrates Peter Manoukian
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Have We Come Full Circle? Judicial Sentencing Discretion Revived In Booker And Fanfan, Sandra D. Jordan
Have We Come Full Circle? Judicial Sentencing Discretion Revived In Booker And Fanfan, Sandra D. Jordan
Pepperdine Law Review
The much anticipated Supreme Court decision in United States v. Booker and Fanfan has both invalidated the mandatory nature of the federal Sentencing Guidelines as well as restored judicial discretion for federal judges. With the Booker decision there is a renewed opportunity to correct some of the imbalance that came about as a result of the mandatory guidelines and the sentencing policies of the past twenty years. Booker has implications for all future sentencing as the power between the judiciary and the jury has been realigned and the power of the government has been reduced. Sentencing cannot accomplish legitimate goals …
Kimbrough And Gall: Taking Another "Crack" At Expanding Judicial Discretion Under The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Chris Gaspard
Kimbrough And Gall: Taking Another "Crack" At Expanding Judicial Discretion Under The Federal Sentencing Guidelines, Chris Gaspard
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.