Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Guidelines are the product of the United States Sentencing Commission, which was created by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. [3] The Guidelines' primary goal was to alleviate sentencing disparities that research had indicated were prevalent in the existing sentencing system, and the guidelines reform was specifically intended to provide for determinate sentencing.
The exception to this rule occurs when the court determines that such use would violate the ex post facto clause of the Constitution – in other words, if the sentencing guidelines have changed so as to increase the penalty "after the fact", so that the sentence is more severe on the sentencing date than was established on the date that the ...
The Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court (ECSC) is a superior court of record for the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), [1] including six independent states: Antigua and Barbuda, the Commonwealth of Dominica, Grenada, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and three British Overseas Territories (Anguilla, British Virgin Islands, and Montserrat).
In Justice Anthony Kennedy's unanimous majority opinion, the Court ruled that commentary issued by the United States Sentencing Commission (which promulgates the United States Sentencing Guidelines) that interprets or explains a guideline is authoritative unless it violates the Constitution or a federal statute, or is inconsistent with, or a plainly erroneous reading of, that guideline.
Sentencing guidelines define a recommended sentencing range for a criminal defendant, based upon characteristics of the defendant and of the criminal charge. Depending upon the jurisdiction, sentencing guidelines may be nonbinding, or their application may be mandatory for the criminal offenses that they cover.
The US Supreme Court has ruled several times in regards to the sentencing of minor: Roper v. Simmons, which ruled that juveniles cannot be sentenced to death. Graham v. Florida, which ruled that juvenile life without parole is unconstitutional for non-homicide juvenile offenders. Miller v.
The Supreme Court has held that every fact that increases the maximum authorized sentence or minimum mandatory sentence must be named in the charging instrument, submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt—whether or not statutory law labels that fact as an element of the offense or a sentencing factor. [25]
Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that the federal appeals courts may not presume that a sentence falling outside the range recommended by the Federal Sentencing Guidelines is unreasonable.