Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
Why March To A Uniform Beat? Adding Honesty And Proportionality To The Tune Of Federal Sentencing, Jelani Jefferson Exum
Why March To A Uniform Beat? Adding Honesty And Proportionality To The Tune Of Federal Sentencing, Jelani Jefferson Exum
Faculty Publications
(Excerpt)
This Article fills a gap in current scholarship concerning the Federal Sentencing Guidelines ("Guidelines") by bringing together many sentencing concerns and refocusing them on the Guidelines themselves. Since United States v. Booker, in which the Supreme Court demoted the Guidelines from mandatory to advisory status and imposed reasonableness as the appellate standard of review, several scholars have written about the new, advisory Guidelines scheme. Some have focused on the constitutional problems that Booker failed to settle. Others have argued against a presumption of reasonableness for within-Guidelines sentences. For some scholars, the biggest issues with the advisory Guidelines regime …
Deciding The Stop And Frisk Cases: A Look Inside The Supreme Court's Conference, John Q. Barrett
Deciding The Stop And Frisk Cases: A Look Inside The Supreme Court's Conference, John Q. Barrett
Faculty Publications
In our system of constitutional decision-making, the Supreme Court makes law as an institution in its formal written opinions. The Court and its individual members make their official legal marks in the printed pages of the United States Reports. In June 1968, in Terry v. Ohio and Sibron v. New York, the two decisions that approved the constitutionality under the Fourth Amendment of police stop and frisk practices, the Court filled many official pages with rich discussion. Over the ensuing thirty years, these Court and individual opinions have shaped the course of constitutional analysis in our courts and guided the …