Regional Sentencing Differences Could Accelerate
The U.S. Supreme Court’s two decisions yesterday giving federal trial judges more sentencing discretion could accelerate regional variations in sentencing.
The pair of decisions “restored federal judges to their traditional central role in criminal sentencing,” the New York Times reports. That could mean sentences will vary more by judge and region.
In Brooklyn federal court, for example, about 30 percent of low sentences not sought by the government are below the guidelines while the number in the eastern district of Louisiana is 5 percent, the New York Times reports in a separate news analysis.
The decisions are also likely to accelerate a trend toward more lenient sentencing, the story says. Overall about 12 percent of sentences are below the guidelines, when sentences that are lowered due to prosecutor requests are factored out. About 5.5 percent were below guidelines in 2004, before the Supreme Court issued its 2005 decision in United States v. Booker saying that federal guidelines are advisory rather than mandatory.
Some judges may use their increased power to give higher as well as lower sentences. Currently, departures are above the guidelines in 1.6 percent of the cases.
Sentencing expert Barry Boss of Cozen O’Connor told Legal Times that the court’s decisions raise new issues for courts. They include how much weight should be given to the guidelines and whether they are retroactive.
The decisions are Kimbrough v. United States and Gall v. United States.
