Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
The Government argued that applying the jury-trial requirement to sentencing enhancements promulgated by a commission would transform those enhancements into a criminal code, resulting in an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power to the judicial branch. In Mistretta v.
The government of Indiana is established and regulated by the Constitution of Indiana. The state-level government consists of three branches: the judicial branch, the legislative branch, and the executive branch. The three branches share power and jointly govern the state of Indiana. County and local governments are also constitutional bodies ...
The Court unanimously held that the "civil rights restored" exemption of convictions for sentence-enhancement purposes did not extend to a defendant who retained his civil rights at all times, and whose postconviction legal status remained in all respects unaltered by any state dispensation.
The Armed Career Criminal Act of 1984 (ACCA) [1] is a United States federal law that provides sentence enhancements for felons who commit crimes with firearms if they are convicted of certain crimes three or more times. Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter was a key proponent for the legislation. [2]
A federal appeals court on Wednesday vacated the 14-year sentence of disgraced lawyer Michael Avenatti, who was convicted of swindling his clients, and ordered he be resentenced. Avenatti, who ...
Sentencing reform is the reform of sentencing. It is a component of the larger concept of criminal justice reform . Reasons for sentencing reform include the effort to change perceived injustices in the lengths of criminal sentences, reducing overcriminalization , improving recidivism and crime prevention .
The life cycle of federal supervision for a defendant. United States federal probation and supervised release are imposed at sentencing. The difference between probation and supervised release is that the former is imposed as a substitute for imprisonment, [1] or in addition to home detention, [2] while the latter is imposed in addition to imprisonment.
Timbs v. Indiana, 586 U.S. 146 (2019), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court considered whether the excessive fines clause of the Constitution's Eighth Amendment applies to state and local governments.