26 Pages Posted: 18 Oct 2015 Last revised: 1 Jul 2016
Date Written: October 15, 2015
Section 4B1.2(a)(2) of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines is identical to statutory language that the U.S. Supreme Court found to be unconstitutionally vague in Johnson v. United States. The panel in this case held that, although 4B1.2(a)(2) is identical to the language from Johnson, it is not unconstitutionally vague because the vagueness doctrine does not apply to the now-advisory Federal Sentencing Guidelines. This brief explains why the panel decision is inconsistent with Supreme Court decisions on the vagueness doctrine and the Sentencing Guidelines.
Keywords: sentencing, sentencing guidelines, due process clause, vagueness doctrine, void for vagueness, United States v. Booker
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Hessick, Carissa Byrne and Berman, Douglas A., United States v. Matchett (11th Cir.) -- Brief of Law Professors as Amicus Curiae in Support of Defendant-Appellant (October 15, 2015). University of Utah College of Law Research Paper No. 137. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2674698