|
|
July 14, 2004 - The Wall Street Journal (US)
Legal Quagmire: High Court Ruling Unleashes Chaos Over Sentencing
Judges, Prosecutors Put Aside Federal Guidelines, Fearing
They're Unconstitutional - 'Boiling Frustration' On Bench
By Laurie P. Cohen and Gary Fields, Staff Reporters, WSJ
When the Supreme Court last month struck down tough sentencing
guidelines used in Washington state, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor
dissented. She feared the ruling would wreak havoc on the nation's
federal courts.
She was right. Although the 5-4 ruling technically affects
only one state's court system, the Justice Department is forcing
prosecutors of federal crimes to draft indictments and sculpt
plea bargains in compliance with it. That has thrown into confusion
the sentencing of nearly 250 federal defendants every day. And
tens of thousands of old cases are up in the air again as defense
attorneys try to get long sentences thrown out.
Now Congress may step in with a bill that might fix the problem
temporarily while legislators, prosecutors and the courts search
for a permanent solution. "The criminal justice system has
begun to run amok," Orrin Hatch, chairman of the Senate
Judiciary Committee, said yesterday.
(Remainder snipped at the request of The Wall Street
Journal)
Crime And Punishment
Milestones in federal sentencing rules:
- 1984: Congress creates U.S. Sentencing Commission to standardize
sentences.
- 1987: First sentencing guidelines created by commission.
- 1995: Commission members try to change cocaine sentences,
but Congress says no.
- 2003: With Feeney Amendment, Congress cracks down on judges
who give lighter sentences.
- June 2004: Supreme Court rules in state case, Blakely
v. Washington, that judges can't use information in sentencing
not heard by jury or admitted to by defendant.
- July: Judges begin ruling that Blakely applies to
federal courts, undermining federal sentencing guidelines.
Source - WSJ research
|
