The Constitutionality of Post-Crime Guidelines Sentencing
McLean County State's Attorney's Office; University of Virginia - School of Law
William Mitchell Law Review, Vol. 37, No. 2, 2011
United States v. Booker famously excised the mandatory provisions of the federal Sentencing Guidelines, making them “effectively advisory.” Judges are still required to calculate the applicable Guidelines range, however, and will rarely be overturned if they impose a within-Guidelines sentence. The question thus arises: if the Guidelines are not formally mandatory, but remain the de facto basis for sentencing, does use of post-crime Guidelines violate the Ex Post Facto Clause? A circuit split on this issue has developed, with the Seventh Circuit authorizing the use of post-crime Guidelines and the D.C. Circuit holding that such use can violate the ex post facto prohibition. This article examines both the legal standards and the empirical evidence, ultimately arguing that the use of post-crime Guidelines does not violate the Ex Post Facto clause.
Number of Pages in PDF File: 26
Keywords: ex post facto, sentencing guidelines, bookerAccepted Paper Series
Date posted: July 7, 2011 ; Last revised: August 30, 2011
© 2014 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This page was processed by apollo7 in 0.500 seconds