rita
argued
february
decided
june
petitioner
rita
sought
sentence
lower
recommended
federal
guidelines
range
months
based
physical
condition
likely
vulnerability
prison
military
experience
judge
concluded
appropriate
sentence
months
bottom
guidelines
range
affirming
fourth
circuit
observed
sentence
imposed
within
properly
calculated
guidelines
range
presumptively
reasonable
held
appeals
may
apply
presumption
reasonableness
district
sentence
within
guidelines
pp
presumption
binding
reflect
strong
judicial
deference
kind
leads
appeals
grant
greater
factfinding
leeway
expert
agency
district
judge
reflects
nature
task
congress
set
sentencing
commission
commission
carries
task
congress
instructed
sentencing
judge
consider
offense
offender
characteristics
need
sentence
reflect
basic
aims
sentencing
sentences
legally
available
sentencing
guidelines
sentencing
commission
policy
statements
need
avoid
unwarranted
disparities
need
restitution
statutes
tell
commission
write
guidelines
carry
basic
objectives
guidelines
written
reflect
fact
sentencing
commission
examined
tens
thousands
sentences
help
law
enforcement
community
long
period
effort
fulfill
statutory
mandate
also
reflect
fact
judges
others
differ
best
reconcile
disparate
ends
punishment
resulting
guidelines
seek
embody
considerations
principle
practice
fair
assume
insofar
practicable
reflect
rough
approximation
sentences
might
achieve
objectives
individual
sentence
reflects
sentencing
judge
determination
commission
application
appropriate
mine
run
cases
individual
case
differ
significantly
consequently
guidelines
sentence
reflects
proper
application
case
hand
reasonableness
presumption
simply
recognizes
circumstances
applies
appellate
review
sentencing
enjoy
presumption
benefit
determining
merits
arguments
prosecution
defense
guidelines
sentence
apply
pp
even
presumption
increases
likelihood
judge
jury
find
sentencing
facts
violate
sixth
amendment
sixth
amendment
cases
forbid
sentencing
take
account
factual
matters
determined
jury
increase
sentence
accordingly
take
account
sentencing
commission
factual
findings
recommended
sentences
relevant
sixth
amendment
inquiry
whether
law
forbids
judge
increase
sentence
unless
judge
finds
facts
jury
find
nonbinding
appellate
reasonableness
presumption
guidelines
sentences
require
sentencing
judge
impose
guidelines
sentence
still
less
forbid
judge
impose
sentence
higher
guidelines
provide
facts
standing
alone
addition
general
conflict
guidelines
appellate
review
purposes
alleviated
judge
commission
determine
guidelines
sentence
appropriate
case
hand
sentence
likely
reflects
factors
pp
district
properly
analyzed
relevant
sentencing
factors
given
record
ultimate
sentence
reasonable
section
calls
judge
state
reasons
insist
full
opinion
every
case
appropriateness
brevity
length
conciseness
detail
write
say
depends
upon
circumstances
law
leaves
much
respect
judge
professional
judgment
present
context
sentencing
judge
articulate
enough
satisfy
appellate
considered
parties
arguments
reasoned
basis
exercising
legal
decisionmaking
authority
may
say
less
decision
rests
upon
commission
reasoning
guidelines
sentence
proper
typical
case
judge
found
case
typical
party
presents
nonfrivolous
reasons
imposing
different
sentence
judge
normally
go
explain
rejected
arguments
sentencing
judge
statement
reasons
brief
legally
sufficient
record
makes
clear
judge
listened
rita
arguments
downward
departure
considered
supporting
evidence
finding
circumstances
insufficient
warrant
sentence
lower
guidelines
range
matter
conceptually
simple
record
makes
clear
sentencing
judge
considered
evidence
arguments
law
require
judge
write
extensively
pp
fourth
circuit
applying
presumption
legally
correct
holding
rita
sentence
unreasonable
like
district
fourth
circuit
simply
say
rita
special
circumstances
health
fear
retaliation
military
record
special
enough
light
require
sentence
lower
one
guidelines
provide
rita
argument
guidelines
sentence
reasonable
expressly
declines
consider
various
personal
characteristics
physical
condition
employment
record
military
service
raised
considered
pp
fed
appx
affirmed
breyer
delivered
opinion
roberts
stevens
kennedy
ginsburg
alito
joined
scalia
thomas
joined
part
iii
stevens
filed
concurring
opinion
ginsburg
joined
part
ii
scalia
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
thomas
joined
souter
filed
dissenting
opinion
victor
rita
petitioner
writ
certiorari
appeals
fourth
circuit
june
justice
breyer
delivered
opinion
federal
courts
appeals
review
federal
sentences
set
aside
find
unreasonable
see
booker
several
circuits
held
presume
sentence
imposed
within
properly
calculated
sentencing
guidelines
range
reasonable
sentence
see
fed
appx
per
curiam
case
see
also
sentencing
commission
guidelines
manual
ussg
guidelines
important
question
us
whether
law
permits
courts
appeals
use
presumption
hold
basic
crime
case
concerns
two
false
statements
victor
rita
petitioner
made
oath
federal
grand
jury
jury
investigating
gun
company
called
interordnance
prosecutors
believed
buyers
interordnance
kit
called
ppsh
machinegun
kit
assemble
machinegun
kit
kits
consequently
amounted
machineguns
interordnance
secured
proper
registrations
importation
guns
app
rita
bought
ppsh
machinegun
parts
kit
rita
contacted
bureau
alcohol
tobacco
firearms
explosives
atf
agreed
let
federal
agent
inspect
kit
supp
app
meeting
agent
rita
called
interordnance
sent
back
kit
subsequently
turned
atf
different
kit
apparently
amount
machinegun
app
supp
app
investigating
prosecutor
brought
rita
grand
jury
placed
oath
asked
matters
rita
denied
government
agent
asked
ppsh
kit
also
denied
spoken
soon
thereafter
ppsh
kit
someone
interordnance
app
supp
app
government
claimed
statements
false
charged
rita
perjury
making
false
statements
obstructing
justice
jury
trial
obtained
convictions
counts
app
parties
subsequently
proceeded
sentencing
initially
probation
officer
help
parties
investigating
background
offenses
offender
prepared
presentence
report
see
fed
rules
crim
proc
completed
report
describes
offense
characteristics
offender
characteristics
matters
might
relevant
sentence
calculates
guidelines
sentence
report
also
sets
forth
factors
potentially
relevant
departure
guidelines
relevant
imposition
sentence
ultimately
makes
sentencing
recommendation
based
guidelines
app
respect
offense
characteristics
example
report
points
five
counts
conviction
stem
single
incident
hence
pursuant
guidelines
report
calculating
recommended
sentence
groups
five
counts
conviction
together
treating
amounted
single
serious
count
among
ignoring
others
see
ussg
single
serious
offense
rita
case
perjury
relevant
guideline
instructs
sentencing
probation
officer
calculate
guidelines
sentence
perjury
respect
criminal
offense
applying
guideline
accessory
fact
criminal
offense
latter
guideline
says
judge
calculation
purposes
take
base
offense
level
level
levels
lower
offense
level
underlying
offense
emphasis
added
offense
perjury
may
helped
someone
commit
underlying
offense
consisted
interordnance
possible
violation
machinegun
registration
law
app
ussg
providing
sentence
violation
importation
defense
articles
without
authorization
base
offense
level
gun
registration
crime
see
ussg
six
levels
less
says
presentence
report
base
offense
level
applicable
rita
purposes
guidelines
sentence
calculation
app
presentence
report
next
considers
rita
criminal
history
rita
convicted
may
sentenced
five
years
probation
making
false
statements
connection
purchase
firearms
conviction
took
place
years
present
offense
count
rita
rita
relevant
convictions
guidelines
considered
criminal
history
points
ibid
report
consequently
places
rita
criminal
history
category
lowest
category
purposes
calculating
guidelines
sentence
report
goes
describe
offender
characteristics
description
includes
rita
personal
family
data
rita
physical
condition
including
detailed
description
ailments
rita
mental
emotional
health
lack
history
substance
abuse
rita
vocational
nonvocational
education
rita
employment
record
served
armed
forces
years
active
duty
reserve
time
received
commendations
awards
medals
different
kinds
report
analyzes
rita
financial
condition
ultimately
report
calculates
guidelines
sentencing
range
guidelines
specify
base
level
criminal
history
category
sentence
months
imprisonment
ibid
report
adds
appears
circumstance
combination
circumstances
warrant
departure
prescribed
sentencing
guidelines
sentencing
hearing
rita
government
presented
sentencing
arguments
side
addressed
report
rita
argued
sentence
outside
lower
recommended
guidelines
month
range
judge
made
clear
rita
argument
lower
sentence
take
either
two
forms
first
rita
might
argue
within
guidelines
framework
departure
applicable
guidelines
range
ground
circumstances
present
atypical
case
falls
outside
heartland
sentencing
commission
intends
individual
guideline
apply
ussg
second
rita
might
argue
independent
guidelines
application
sentencing
factors
set
forth
ed
supp
iv
warrants
lower
sentence
see
booker
thus
judge
asked
rita
counsel
going
put
evidence
show
rita
getting
downward
departure
client
entitled
different
sentence
get
sentencing
guidelines
app
judge
later
summarized
ou
asking
departure
guidelines
sentence
lower
guidelines
reasons
one
vulnerable
defendant
involved
government
criminal
justice
work
caused
people
become
convicted
criminals
prison
may
retribution
two
military
experience
counsel
agreed
adding
rita
poor
physical
condition
constituted
third
reason
counsel
said
rested
claim
lower
sentence
ust
three
special
circumstances
hysical
condition
vulnerability
prison
military
service
rita
presented
evidence
argument
related
three
factors
government
asking
sentence
higher
report
recommended
guidelines
range
said
rita
perjury
interfered
government
potential
obstruction
justice
claim
interordnance
rita
former
government
criminal
justice
employee
known
better
commit
perjury
sentencing
judge
asked
questions
factor
hearing
arguments
judge
concluded
unable
find
report
recommended
sentencing
guideline
range
inappropriate
guideline
range
public
needs
protected
true
must
accept
true
jury
verdict
concluded
finds
appropriate
enter
sentence
bottom
guidelines
range
namely
sentence
imprisonment
period
months
ibid
appeal
rita
argued
sentence
unreasonable
adequately
take
account
defendant
history
characteristics
greater
necessary
comply
purposes
sentencing
set
forth
brief
appellant
pp
fourth
circuit
observed
must
set
aside
sentence
reasonable
circuit
stated
sentence
imposed
within
properly
calculated
guidelines
range
presumptively
reasonable
added
believe
appropriate
circumstances
imposing
sentence
outside
guideline
range
depend
facts
individual
cases
reason
doubt
sentences
continue
fall
within
applicable
guideline
range
fourth
circuit
rejected
rita
arguments
upheld
sentence
ibid
internal
quotation
marks
omitted
rita
petitioned
writ
certiorari
pointed
circuits
split
use
presumption
reasonableness
sentences
compare
dorcely
cadc
uses
presumption
green
alonzo
williams
mykytiuk
lincoln
kristl
per
curiam
en
banc
use
presumption
fernandez
cooper
talley
per
curiam
consequently
granted
rita
petition
agreed
decide
whether
circuit
may
afford
presumption
reasonableness
sentence
also
agreed
decide
whether
district
properly
analyzed
relevant
sentencing
factors
whether
given
record
district
ultimate
choice
sentence
unreasonable
ii
first
question
whether
appeals
may
apply
presumption
reasonableness
district
sentence
reflects
proper
application
sentencing
guidelines
conclude
one
thing
presumption
binding
like
evidentiary
presumption
insist
one
side
shoulder
particular
burden
persuasion
proof
lest
lose
case
raytheon
hernandez
citing
reeves
sanderson
plumbing
products
mcdonnell
douglas
green
presumption
reflect
strong
judicial
deference
kind
leads
appeals
courts
grant
greater
factfinding
leeway
expert
agency
district
judge
rather
presumption
reflects
fact
time
appeals
considering
sentence
review
sentencing
judge
sentencing
commission
reached
conclusion
proper
sentence
particular
case
double
determination
significantly
increases
likelihood
sentence
reasonable
one
presumption
reflects
nature
task
congress
set
commission
manner
commission
carried
task
instructing
sentencing
judge
commission
congress
referred
basic
sentencing
objectives
statute
sets
forth
ed
supp
iv
provision
tells
sentencing
judge
consider
offense
offender
characteristics
need
sentence
reflect
basic
aims
sentencing
namely
punishment
retribution
deterrence
incapacitation
rehabilitation
sentences
legally
available
sentencing
guidelines
sentencing
commission
policy
statements
need
avoid
unwarranted
disparities
need
restitution
provision
also
tells
sentencing
judge
impose
sentence
sufficient
greater
necessary
comply
basic
aims
sentencing
set
congressional
statutes
tell
commission
write
guidelines
carry
objectives
thus
indicates
one
commission
basic
objectives
assure
meeting
purposes
sentencing
set
forth
provision
adds
commission
must
seek
provide
certainty
fairness
sentencing
avoi
unwarranted
sentencing
disparities
maintai
sufficient
flexibility
permit
individualized
sentences
warranted
mitigating
aggravating
factors
taken
account
establishment
general
sentencing
practices
reflect
extent
practicable
advancement
knowledge
human
behavior
later
provisions
specifically
instruct
commission
write
guidelines
reference
statement
purposes
statement
refers
see
upshot
sentencing
statutes
envision
sentencing
judge
commission
carrying
basic
objectives
one
retail
wholesale
commission
made
serious
sometimes
controversial
effort
carry
mandate
commission
describing
efforts
refers
statutory
provisions
says
tried
embody
guidelines
factors
considerations
set
forth
commission
introductory
statement
recognizes
congress
foresees
guidelines
basic
purposes
criminal
punishment
deterring
crime
incapacitating
offender
providing
punishment
rehabilitating
offender
ussg
intro
pt
statutory
mission
adds
congress
sought
uniformity
sentencing
narrowing
wide
disparity
sentences
imposed
different
federal
courts
similar
criminal
conduct
well
proportionality
sentencing
system
imposes
appropriately
different
sentences
criminal
conduct
different
severity
ibid
basic
approach
guidelines
commentary
explains
despite
considerable
disagreement
within
criminal
justice
community
commission
gone
writing
guidelines
intends
embody
ends
says
example
goals
uniformity
proportionality
often
conflict
commentary
describes
difficulties
involved
developing
practical
sentencing
system
sensibly
reconciles
two
ends
adds
philosophical
problem
arose
commission
attempted
reconcile
differing
perceptions
purposes
criminal
punishment
emphasize
moral
culpability
punishment
others
emphasize
need
crime
control
rather
choose
among
differing
practical
philosophical
objectives
commission
took
empirical
approach
beginning
empirical
examination
presentence
reports
setting
forth
judges
done
past
modifying
adjusting
past
practice
interests
greater
rationality
avoiding
inconsistency
complying
congressional
instructions
like
guidelines
written
reflect
fact
sentencing
commission
examined
tens
thousands
sentences
worked
help
many
others
law
enforcement
community
long
period
time
effort
fulfill
statutory
mandate
also
reflect
fact
different
judges
others
differ
best
reconcile
disparate
ends
punishment
commission
work
ongoing
statutes
guidelines
foresee
continuous
evolution
helped
sentencing
courts
courts
appeals
process
sentencing
courts
applying
guidelines
individual
cases
may
depart
either
pursuant
guidelines
since
booker
imposing
sentence
judges
set
forth
reasons
courts
appeals
determine
reasonableness
resulting
sentence
commission
collect
examine
results
may
obtain
advice
prosecutors
defenders
law
enforcement
groups
civil
liberties
associations
experts
penology
others
revise
guidelines
accordingly
see
generally
note
following
commission
review
amend
guidelines
necessary
congress
power
revoke
amend
guidelines
mistretta
ussg
listing
amendments
promulgated
response
evolving
sentencing
concerns
ussg
comment
result
set
guidelines
seek
embody
considerations
principle
practice
given
difficulties
abstract
potentially
conflicting
nature
general
sentencing
objectives
differences
philosophical
view
among
work
within
criminal
justice
community
best
apply
general
sentencing
objectives
fair
assume
guidelines
insofar
practicable
reflect
rough
approximation
sentences
might
achieve
objectives
individual
judge
imposes
sentence
within
range
recommended
guidelines
thus
makes
decision
fully
consistent
commission
judgment
general
despite
justice
souter
fears
contrary
post
dissenting
opinion
courts
appeals
reasonableness
presumption
rather
independent
legal
effect
simply
recognizes
circumstance
judge
discretionary
decision
accords
commission
view
appropriate
application
mine
run
cases
probable
sentence
reasonable
indeed
even
circuits
declined
adopt
formal
presumption
also
recognize
guidelines
sentence
usually
reasonable
reflects
commission
sentencing
judgment
appropriate
sentence
given
offender
see
fernandez
cooper
talley
repeat
presumption
us
appellate
presumption
given
explanation
booker
appellate
reasonableness
review
merely
asks
whether
trial
abused
discretion
presumption
applies
appellate
review
sentencing
judge
matter
process
normally
begin
considering
presentence
report
interpretation
guidelines
fed
rule
crim
proc
may
hear
arguments
prosecution
defense
guidelines
sentence
apply
perhaps
guidelines
foresee
case
hand
falls
outside
heartland
commission
intends
individual
guidelines
apply
ussg
perhaps
guidelines
sentence
fails
properly
reflect
considerations
perhaps
case
warrants
different
sentence
regardless
see
rule
thus
sentencing
subjects
defendant
sentence
thorough
adversarial
testing
contemplated
federal
sentencing
procedure
see
rules
see
also
burns
recognizing
importance
notice
meaningful
opportunity
heard
sentencing
determining
merits
arguments
sentencing
enjoy
benefit
legal
presumption
guidelines
sentence
apply
booker
rita
supporting
amici
make
two
arguments
use
presumption
first
rita
points
many
individual
guidelines
apply
higher
sentences
presence
special
facts
example
brandishing
weapon
many
cases
sentencing
judge
jury
determine
existence
facts
presumption
reasonableness
increase
likelihood
courts
appeals
affirm
sentences
thereby
increasing
likelihood
sentencing
judges
impose
sentences
reason
rita
says
presumption
raises
sixth
amendment
concerns
brief
petitioner
view
however
presumption
even
increases
likelihood
judge
jury
find
sentencing
facts
violate
sixth
amendment
sixth
amendment
cases
automatically
forbid
sentencing
take
account
factual
matters
determined
jury
increase
sentence
consequence
prohibit
sentencing
judge
taking
account
sentencing
commission
factual
findings
recommended
sentences
see
cunningham
california
slip
citing
booker
supra
blakely
washington
ring
arizona
apprendi
new
jersey
sixth
amendment
question
said
whether
law
forbids
judge
increase
defendant
sentence
unless
judge
finds
facts
jury
find
offender
concede
blakely
supra
judge
inflicts
punishment
jury
verdict
alone
allow
jury
found
facts
law
makes
essential
punishment
judge
exceeds
proper
authority
internal
quotation
marks
citation
omitted
see
cunningham
supra
slip
discussing
blakely
judge
sentenced
blakely
standard
range
without
finding
additional
fact
deliberate
cruelty
ecause
judge
blakely
case
imposed
sentence
outside
standard
range
without
finding
additional
fact
top
range
relevant
maximum
sentence
sixth
amendment
purposes
booker
fact
prior
conviction
necessary
support
sentence
exceeding
maximum
authorized
facts
established
plea
guilty
jury
verdict
must
admitted
defendant
proved
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
discussing
blakely
rejected
state
argument
jury
verdict
sufficient
authorize
sentence
within
general
sentence
class
felonies
noting
washington
law
judge
required
find
additional
facts
order
impose
greater
sentence
emphasis
original
nonbinding
appellate
presumption
guidelines
sentence
reasonable
require
sentencing
judge
impose
sentence
still
less
forbid
sentencing
judge
imposing
sentence
higher
guidelines
provide
facts
standing
alone
far
law
concerned
judge
disregard
guidelines
apply
sentence
higher
statutory
minimum
bottom
unenhanced
guidelines
range
absence
special
facts
say
gun
brandishing
view
sentencing
commission
warrant
higher
sentence
within
statutorily
permissible
range
thus
sixth
amendment
cases
forbid
appellate
use
presumption
justice
scalia
concedes
sixth
amendment
concerns
foresees
presented
case
post
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
need
rely
hypotheticals
make
point
consistent
view
approach
adopted
raise
multitude
constitutional
problems
clark
martinez
similarly
justice
scalia
agrees
never
held
sixth
amendment
prohibits
judges
ever
finding
facts
relevant
sentencing
post
sentencing
areas
district
judges
time
make
mistakes
substantive
times
impose
sentences
unreasonable
circuit
courts
exist
correct
mistakes
occur
decision
booker
recognized
much
booker
held
unconstitutional
portion
guidelines
made
mandatory
also
recognized
district
courts
impose
discretionary
sentences
reviewed
normal
appellate
principles
courts
appeals
sentencing
scheme
ordinarily
raise
sixth
amendment
concern
ibid
see
opinion
stevens
indeed
everyone
agrees
constitutional
issues
presented
cases
avoided
entirely
congress
omitted
federal
sentencing
statute
provisions
make
guidelines
binding
district
judges
opinion
booker
made
clear
today
holding
violate
sixth
amendment
rita
may
correct
presumption
encourage
sentencing
judges
impose
guidelines
sentences
see
fact
change
constitutional
calculus
congress
sought
diminish
unwarranted
sentencing
disparity
sought
guidelines
system
bring
greater
fairness
sentencing
increased
uniformity
fact
presumption
might
help
achieve
congressional
goals
provide
cause
holding
presumption
unlawful
long
presumption
remains
constitutional
given
case
law
conclude
presumption
violates
sixth
amendment
fact
permit
courts
appeals
adopt
presumption
reasonableness
mean
courts
may
adopt
presumption
unreasonableness
even
government
concedes
appellate
courts
may
presume
every
variance
advisory
guidelines
unreasonable
see
brief
several
courts
appeals
also
rejected
presumption
unreasonableness
see
howard
matheny
myers
moreland
however
number
circuits
adhere
proposition
strength
justification
needed
sustain
sentence
varies
proportion
degree
variance
see
smith
moreland
armendariz
davis
dean
dalton
bishop
crisp
consider
approach
next
term
gall
second
rita
amici
claim
use
guidelines
presumption
appeal
conflicts
congress
insistence
sentencing
judges
apply
factors
set
forth
supp
iv
resulting
sentence
sufficient
greater
necessary
comply
purposes
sentencing
set
forth
statute
explained
however
believe
judge
commission
determine
guidelines
sentences
appropriate
sentence
case
hand
sentence
likely
reflects
factors
including
greater
necessary
requirement
see
supra
circumstance
alleviates
serious
general
conflict
guidelines
purposes
appellate
review
reason
find
nothing
renders
use
presumption
unlawful
iii
next
turn
question
whether
district
properly
analyzed
relevant
sentencing
factors
particular
rita
argues
took
inadequate
account
supp
iv
provision
requires
sentencing
judge
time
sentencing
state
open
reasons
imposition
particular
sentence
view
given
straightforward
conceptually
simple
arguments
judge
judge
statement
reasons
though
brief
legally
sufficient
statute
call
judge
state
reasons
requirement
reflects
sound
judicial
practice
judicial
decisions
reasoned
decisions
confidence
judge
use
reason
underlies
public
trust
judicial
institution
public
statement
reasons
helps
provide
public
assurance
creates
trust
said
read
statute
precedent
insisting
upon
full
opinion
every
case
appropriateness
brevity
length
conciseness
detail
write
say
depends
upon
circumstances
sometimes
judicial
opinion
responds
every
argument
sometimes
sometimes
judge
simply
writes
word
granted
denied
face
motion
relying
upon
context
parties
prior
arguments
make
reasons
clear
law
leaves
much
respect
judge
professional
judgment
present
context
statement
reasons
important
sentencing
judge
set
forth
enough
satisfy
appellate
considered
parties
arguments
reasoned
basis
exercising
legal
decisionmaking
authority
see
taylor
nonetheless
judge
decides
simply
apply
guidelines
particular
case
necessarily
require
lengthy
explanation
circumstances
may
well
make
clear
judge
rests
decision
upon
commission
reasoning
guidelines
sentence
proper
sentence
terms
congressional
mandates
typical
case
judge
found
case
typical
unless
party
contests
guidelines
sentence
generally
argues
guidelines
reflect
unsound
judgment
example
generally
treat
certain
defendant
characteristics
proper
way
argues
departure
judge
normally
need
say
cf
supp
iv
although
often
sentencing
judge
speak
length
defendant
practice
may
indeed
serve
salutary
purpose
defendant
prosecutor
presents
nonfrivolous
reasons
imposing
different
sentence
however
judge
normally
go
explain
rejected
arguments
sometimes
circumstances
call
brief
explanation
sometimes
call
lengthier
explanation
judge
imposes
sentence
outside
guidelines
judge
explain
done
knowledge
ordinary
explanation
judicial
reasons
judge
applied
guidelines
triggers
sixth
amendment
jury
trial
requirement
cf
booker
trial
judge
exercises
discretion
select
specific
sentence
within
defined
range
defendant
right
jury
determination
facts
judge
deems
relevant
requirement
finding
articulation
creates
sixth
amendment
problem
articulating
reasons
even
brief
sentencing
judge
assures
reviewing
courts
public
sentencing
process
reasoned
process
also
helps
process
evolve
sentencing
judge
access
greater
familiarity
individual
case
individual
defendant
commission
appeals
reasoned
sentencing
judgment
resting
upon
effort
filter
guidelines
general
advice
list
factors
provide
relevant
information
appeals
ultimately
sentencing
commission
reasoned
responses
latter
institutions
sentencing
judge
explanation
help
guidelines
constructively
evolve
time
congress
commission
foresaw
see
generally
supra
present
case
sentencing
judge
statement
reasons
brief
legally
sufficient
rita
argued
downward
departure
month
guidelines
sentence
basis
three
sets
special
circumstances
health
fear
retaliation
prison
military
record
see
app
added
event
circumstances
warrant
leniency
beyond
contemplated
guidelines
record
makes
clear
sentencing
judge
listened
argument
judge
considered
supporting
evidence
judge
fully
aware
defendant
various
physical
ailments
imposed
sentence
takes
account
judge
understood
rita
previously
worked
immigration
service
involved
detecting
criminal
offenses
considered
rita
lengthy
military
service
including
years
service
active
duty
reserve
rita
receipt
medals
awards
nominations
judge
simply
found
circumstances
insufficient
warrant
sentence
lower
guidelines
range
months
said
range
inappropriate
course
legal
standard
imposition
sentence
taken
context
plain
judge
understood
immediately
added
found
sentence
bottom
guidelines
range
appropriate
ibid
must
believed
much
say
acknowledge
judge
might
said
might
added
explicitly
heard
considered
evidence
argument
one
denied
thought
commission
guidelines
determined
sentence
proper
minerun
roughly
similar
perjury
cases
found
rita
personal
circumstances
simply
different
enough
warrant
different
sentence
context
record
make
clear
similar
reasoning
underlies
judge
conclusion
matter
conceptually
simple
case
hand
record
makes
clear
sentencing
judge
considered
evidence
arguments
believe
law
requires
judge
write
extensively
iv
turn
final
question
appeals
applying
presumption
legally
correct
holding
rita
sentence
sentence
applied
depart
relevant
sentencing
guideline
unreasonable
view
appeals
conclusion
lawful
previously
said
see
part
supra
crimes
issue
perjury
obstruction
justice
essence
offenses
involved
making
knowingly
false
material
statements
oath
grand
jury
thereby
impeding
criminal
investigation
guidelines
provide
typical
offense
base
offense
level
levels
level
provided
simple
violation
crime
investigated
unlawful
importation
machineguns
offender
rita
countable
prior
offenses
consequently
falls
within
criminal
history
category
intersection
base
offense
level
criminal
history
category
sets
forth
sentencing
range
imprisonment
months
rita
argued
sentencing
circumstances
special
based
argument
upon
health
fear
retaliation
prior
military
record
sentence
explicitly
takes
health
account
seeking
assurance
bureau
prisons
provide
appropriate
treatment
record
makes
special
fear
retaliation
asserting
threat
one
former
law
enforcement
official
might
suffer
similarly
though
rita
lengthy
distinguished
military
record
claim
sentencing
military
service
ordinarily
lead
sentence
lenient
sentence
guidelines
impose
like
district
appeals
simply
say
rita
special
circumstances
special
enough
light
require
sentence
lower
sentence
guidelines
provide
finally
rita
supporting
amici
claim
guidelines
sentence
reasonable
expressly
declines
consider
various
personal
characteristics
defendant
physical
condition
employment
record
military
service
view
factors
ordinarily
relevant
ussg
rita
make
argument
shall
consider
foregoing
reasons
judgment
appeals
affirmed
victor
rita
petitioner
writ
certiorari
appeals
fourth
circuit
june
justice
stevens
justice
ginsburg
joins
part
ii
concurring
secret
remedial
opinion
booker
unanimous
see
stevens
dissenting
booker
settled
law
must
accepted
see
cardozo
nature
judicial
process
labor
judges
increased
almost
breaking
point
every
past
decision
reopened
every
case
one
lay
one
course
bricks
secure
foundation
courses
laid
others
gone
therefore
task
today
apply
booker
reasonableness
standard
district
judge
decision
impose
sentence
within
range
recommended
sentencing
guidelines
advisory
rather
binding
simply
stated
booker
replaced
de
novo
standard
review
required
standard
called
review
noted
booker
de
novo
standard
recent
addition
law
prior
appellate
courts
reviewed
sentencing
departures
abuse
discretion
decision
koon
however
congress
overruled
koon
added
de
novo
standard
see
prosecutorial
remedies
tools
end
exploitation
children
today
act
stat
recognizing
reasons
th
revisio
make
guidelines
sentencing
even
mandatory
ceased
relevant
light
constitutional
booker
excised
portion
directed
courts
appeals
apply
de
novo
standard
critically
touch
portions
requiring
appellate
courts
give
due
regard
opportunity
district
judge
credibility
witnesses
accept
findings
fact
district
unless
clearly
erroneous
give
due
deference
district
application
guidelines
facts
leaving
portions
statute
intact
severing
portion
mandating
de
novo
standard
review
booker
restored
standard
identified
three
earlier
cases
pierce
underwood
cooter
gell
hartmarx
koon
see
booker
pierce
considered
whether
district
properly
awarded
attorney
fees
based
determination
government
litigation
position
substantially
justified
within
meaning
equal
access
justice
act
act
specify
standard
review
found
necessary
rely
several
significant
relevant
factors
persuaded
us
apply
standard
one
factor
district
judge
appellate
judge
decide
issue
quoting
miller
fenton
noted
district
participation
settlement
conferences
pretrial
activities
may
insights
conveyed
record
matters
whether
particular
evidence
worthy
relied
upon
likewise
noted
even
district
judge
full
knowledge
factual
setting
acquired
appellate
acquisition
often
come
unusual
expense
ibid
second
factor
found
significant
impracticability
formulating
rule
decision
issue
may
involve
fleeting
special
narrow
facts
utterly
resist
generalization
cooter
gell
held
factors
supported
standard
review
district
judge
imposition
sanctions
violations
rule
federal
rules
civil
procedure
see
third
factor
district
special
knowledge
local
bar
litigation
practices
also
supported
standard
noted
eference
determination
courts
front
lines
litigation
enhance
courts
ability
control
litigants
ibid
recognizing
factors
bear
equally
upon
trial
judge
sentencing
decision
koon
expressly
applied
principles
pierce
cooter
gell
sentencing
context
see
koon
adopted
standard
unanimously
holding
district
decision
depart
guidelines
cases
due
substantial
deference
embodies
traditional
exercise
discretion
sentencing
id
echoing
earlier
opinions
added
istrict
courts
institutional
advantage
appellate
courts
must
make
refined
assessment
many
facts
bearing
outcome
informed
vantage
point
experience
criminal
sentencing
ibid
also
relied
following
statement
opinion
williams
development
guideline
sentencing
regime
changed
view
except
extent
specifically
directed
statute
role
appellate
substitute
judgment
sentencing
appropriateness
particular
sentence
quoting
solem
helm
basic
considerations
nature
sentencing
changed
world
specific
holding
koon
concerned
scope
trial
judge
discretion
whether
depart
guidelines
guidelines
longer
mandatory
reasoning
applies
equal
force
sentencing
judge
decision
appropriateness
particular
sentence
williams
booker
appellate
courts
assess
district
exercise
discretion
regard
explained
section
remains
effect
sets
forth
numerous
factors
guide
sentencing
factors
turn
guide
appellate
courts
past
determining
whether
sentence
unreasonable
ibid
guided
factors
booker
standard
directs
appellate
courts
evaluate
motivated
district
judge
individualized
sentencing
decision
reviewing
courts
may
presume
sentence
within
advisory
guidelines
reasonable
appellate
judges
must
still
always
defer
sentencing
judge
individualized
sentencing
determination
stated
koon
uniform
constant
federal
judicial
tradition
sentencing
judge
consider
every
convicted
person
individual
every
case
unique
study
human
failings
sometimes
mitigate
sometimes
magnify
crime
punishment
ensue
commission
developed
standards
recommendations
affect
sentencing
ranges
many
individual
characteristics
matters
age
education
mental
emotional
condition
medical
condition
including
drug
alcohol
addiction
employment
history
lack
guidance
youth
family
ties
military
civic
charitable
public
service
ordinarily
considered
guidelines
see
sentencing
commission
guidelines
manual
however
matters
authorizes
sentencing
judge
consider
see
factors
appellate
must
consider
booker
standard
disagreement
justice
scalia
justice
souter
rests
understanding
booker
standard
appellate
review
join
justice
scalia
opinion
believe
purely
procedural
review
advocates
inconsistent
remedial
opinion
booker
plainly
contemplated
reasonableness
review
contain
substantive
component
see
district
judge
gives
harsh
sentences
yankees
fans
lenient
sentences
red
sox
fans
acting
reasonably
even
procedural
rulings
impeccable
moreover
even
future
unusually
harsh
sentence
might
violate
sixth
amendment
exceeds
judicial
standard
reasonableness
justice
scalia
correctly
acknowledges
case
present
problem
see
post
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
claim
sixth
amendment
violated
case
petitioner
demonstrate
relatively
low
sentence
unreasonable
district
relied
nothing
admitted
facts
see
also
ante
justice
scalia
concedes
sixth
amendment
concerns
foresees
presented
case
post
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
need
rely
hypotheticals
make
point
consistent
view
approach
adopted
multitude
constitutional
problems
clark
martinez
hypothetical
case
decided
arises
see
valley
forge
christian
college
americans
separation
church
state
justice
souter
opinion
think
overestimates
gravitational
pull
towards
advisory
guidelines
result
presumption
reasonableness
post
dissenting
opinion
booker
standard
review
allows
indeed
requires
district
judges
consider
factors
listed
apply
individual
defendants
appellate
courts
must
give
deference
sentencing
decisions
made
judges
whether
resulting
sentence
inside
outside
advisory
guidelines
range
traditional
principles
acknowledges
moreover
presumptively
reasonable
mean
always
reasonable
presumption
course
must
genuinely
rebuttable
see
ante
blind
fact
practical
matter
many
federal
judges
continued
treat
guidelines
virtually
mandatory
decision
booker
see
post
scalia
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
one
federal
judge
even
written
watching
courts
appeals
whether
formally
adopted
presumption
affirm
hundreds
upon
hundreds
sentences
seems
rebuttability
presumption
theoretical
real
pruitt
app
lexis
june
mcconnell
concurring
decision
today
makes
clear
however
rebuttability
presumption
real
also
clear
appellate
courts
must
review
sentences
individually
deferentially
whether
inside
guidelines
range
thus
potentially
subject
formal
presumption
reasonableness
outside
range
given
clarity
holding
trust
judges
treated
guidelines
virtually
mandatory
interregnum
recognize
guidelines
truly
advisory
applying
standard
affirm
sentence
imposed
district
although
imposed
lower
sentence
district
judge
agree
abuse
discretion
making
particular
decision
also
agree
decision
entitled
added
respect
consistent
advice
guidelines
ii
said
believe
significant
flaw
sentencing
procedure
case
petitioner
veteran
received
significant
recognition
service
country
aspect
background
taken
consideration
sentencing
guidelines
mentioned
district
judge
explanation
choice
sentence
defendant
received
regard
serious
omission
think
judge
statement
defendant
made
time
sentencing
especially
important
part
criminal
process
defendant
convinced
justice
done
case
society
dealt
fairly
likelihood
successful
rehabilitation
surely
enhanced
nevertheless
given
importance
paying
appropriate
respect
exercise
sentencing
judge
discretion
join
opinion
judgment
victor
rita
petitioner
writ
certiorari
appeals
fourth
circuit
june
justice
scalia
justice
thomas
joins
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
booker
five
justices
among
held
previous
decision
blakely
washington
applied
sentences
imposed
federal
sentencing
guidelines
guidelines
mandatory
binding
judges
see
thus
reaffirmed
ny
fact
prior
conviction
necessary
support
sentence
exceeding
maximum
authorized
facts
established
plea
guilty
jury
verdict
must
admitted
defendant
proved
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
response
constitutional
holding
different
majority
five
justices
held
appropriate
remedy
make
guidelines
nonmandatory
cases
review
sentences
appeal
reasonableness
see
disagreed
remedial
choice
believing
instead
proper
remedy
maintain
mandatory
character
guidelines
simply
require
small
category
cases
fact
legally
essential
sentence
imposed
fact
proved
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
admitted
defendant
see
stevens
joined
scalia
souter
dissenting
part
mean
reopen
debate
matter
statutory
stare
decisis
accept
booker
remedial
holding
district
courts
longer
bound
guidelines
appellate
courts
review
sentences
imposed
reasonableness
clear
need
decide
case
today
however
precisely
reasonableness
review
entails
dictated
booker
lamented
worst
feature
scheme
one
knows
perhaps
one
meant
know
advisory
guidelines
review
function
practice
scalia
dissenting
part
earlier
term
intensified
silence
declined
flesh
mind
face
argument
form
reasonableness
review
constitutional
implications
cunningham
california
justice
alito
defended
constitutionality
california
sentencing
system
part
arguing
even
federal
sentences
upheld
reasonable
judge
makes
additional
findings
fact
beyond
encompassed
jury
verdict
guilty
plea
slip
dissenting
opinion
cunningham
majority
response
much
like
booker
remedial
opinion
cryptic
explain
justice
alito
incorrect
strongly
intimated
premise
wrong
erroneously
anticipate
reasonableness
review
operates
practice
cunningham
slip
question
squarely
presented
case
pending
found
neither
necessary
proper
join
issue
justice
alito
matter
suggesting
revealed
opinion
issue
today
see
slip
today
arrived
broken
promise
nothing
opinion
explains
advisory
guidelines
scheme
facts
never
legally
necessary
justify
sentence
mean
failed
establish
every
sentence
imposed
advisory
guidelines
scheme
equally
imposed
judge
relied
upon
facts
found
jury
admitted
defendant
fact
implicitly
quite
plainly
acknowledges
case
treating
permissible
claim
petitioner
challenge
sentence
substantively
excessive
see
ante
part
iv
scheme
promulgated
today
sentences
reversed
excessive
legally
authorized
later
cases
additional
facts
present
justice
alito
argued
cunningham
lengthy
sentences
affirmed
held
lawful
presence
aggravating
facts
found
jury
distinguish
case
even
attempt
explain
consistent
sixth
amendment
explanation
given
explanation
possible
reintroduced
constitutional
defect
booker
purported
eliminate
acquiesce
course
sentencing
system
permissible
sentences
lawfully
imposed
judge
unless
judge
finds
certain
facts
preponderance
evidence
left
place
compulsory
guidelines
congress
enacted
instead
imposing
scheme
order
avoid
possibility
sixth
amendment
violation
object
booker
remedy
district
courts
must
able
without
finding
facts
embraced
jury
verdict
guilty
plea
sentence
maximum
statutory
range
therefore
appellate
courts
reverse
sentences
high
one
contend
congress
intended
sentences
reviewed
low
hold
reasonableness
review
contain
substantive
component
believe
however
appellate
courts
nevertheless
secure
amount
sentencing
uniformity
procedural
reasonableness
review
made
possible
booker
remedial
opinion
sixth
amendment
requires
ny
fact
prior
conviction
necessary
support
sentence
exceeding
maximum
authorized
facts
established
plea
guilty
jury
verdict
must
admitted
defendant
proved
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
booker
two
hypotheticals
suffice
reveal
notion
excessive
sentences
within
statutory
range
ability
appellate
courts
reverse
sentences
inexorably
produces
violation
sixth
amendment
sentences
whose
legality
premised
judge
finding
fact
combination
facts
preponderance
evidence
first
consider
two
brothers
similar
backgrounds
criminal
histories
convicted
jury
respectively
robbing
two
banks
equal
amount
money
next
assume
district
judge
finds
one
brother
fueled
racial
animus
targeted
first
bank
owned
operated
minorities
whereas
brother
selected
second
bank
simply
location
enabled
quick
getaway
assume
district
judge
imposes
statutory
maximum
upon
brothers
basing
sentences
primarily
upon
perception
bank
robbery
punished
much
severely
guidelines
base
level
advises
explicitly
noting
racially
biased
decisionmaking
first
brother
justified
sentence
imagine
appellate
reverses
excessive
sentence
nonracist
brother
given
dual
holdings
appellate
racist
valid
sixth
amendment
claim
sentence
reasonable
hence
lawful
judicial
finding
motive
selecting
second
consider
common
case
district
imposes
sentence
within
advisory
guidelines
range
substantially
enhanced
certain
facts
example
base
offense
level
robbery
guidelines
sentencing
commission
guidelines
manual
defendant
criminal
history
corresponds
advisory
range
months
ch
pt
sentencing
table
however
judge
finds
firearm
discharged
victim
incurred
serious
bodily
injury
million
stolen
base
level
jumps
producing
advisory
range
months
ch
pt
sentencing
table
judge
finds
facts
true
imposes
sentence
months
facts
combination
merely
facts
judge
finds
relevant
exercising
discretion
legally
essential
predicate
imposition
sentence
failure
find
render
sentence
unlawful
evident
district
judge
explicitly
find
none
facts
true
nevertheless
impose
sentence
simply
thinks
robbery
merits
seven
times
sentence
guidelines
provide
sentence
surely
reversed
unreasonably
excessive
hypotheticals
stylized
ways
illustrating
basic
problem
system
district
courts
lack
full
discretion
sentence
within
statutory
range
system
every
given
crime
maximum
sentence
upheld
reasonable
based
facts
found
jury
admitted
defendant
every
sentence
higher
legally
authorized
fact
violation
sixth
amendment
appellate
courts
excessiveness
review
explicitly
implicitly
accept
facts
justifying
sentences
otherwise
unlawful
difference
system
mandatory
guidelines
maximum
sentence
based
jury
verdict
guilty
plea
specified
latter
must
established
appellate
courts
fashion
former
anything
additional
constitutional
disease
constitutional
cure
clear
suggesting
sixth
amendment
prohibits
judges
ever
finding
facts
repeatedly
affirmed
proposition
judges
find
facts
help
guide
discretion
within
sentencing
range
authorized
facts
found
jury
admitted
defendant
see
booker
supra
apprendi
new
jersey
fundamental
difference
one
underpinning
entire
apprendi
jurisprudence
facts
must
found
order
sentence
lawful
facts
individual
judges
choose
make
relevant
exercise
discretion
former
latter
must
found
jury
beyond
reasonable
doubt
order
give
intelligible
content
right
jury
trial
blakely
also
contending
sixth
amendment
problem
affirmation
presumption
reasonableness
sentences
agree
presumption
never
makes
facts
legally
essential
sentence
imposed
since
direct
relevance
whether
sentence
unreasonable
absence
facts
see
ante
claim
sixth
amendment
violated
case
petitioner
demonstrate
relatively
low
sentence
unreasonable
district
relied
nothing
admitted
facts
rather
position
inevitably
constitutional
violations
system
substantive
reasonableness
review
sentences
upheld
reasonable
existence
facts
booker
reveals
reality
dooms
construct
reasonableness
review
established
applied
today
opinion
booker
made
two
things
quite
plain
first
reasonableness
standard
review
implicitly
contained
within
sentencing
reform
act
sra
second
congress
wanted
uniform
system
sentencing
review
rather
different
schemes
depending
whether
sixth
amendment
problems
particular
cases
thus
contours
reasonableness
review
must
narrowed
cases
constitutional
concerns
must
narrowed
cases
light
congress
desire
uniform
standard
review
justices
composing
today
total
agreement
principle
statutory
interpretation
day
booker
decided
hen
deciding
two
plausible
statutory
constructions
adopt
must
consider
necessary
consequences
choice
one
raise
multitude
constitutional
problems
prevail
whether
constitutional
problems
pertain
particular
litigant
clark
martinez
opinion
scalia
joined
inter
alios
stevens
kennedy
ginsburg
breyer
yet
adopt
substantive
reasonableness
review
without
offering
rebuttal
charge
patent
constitutional
flaw
inherent
review
one
comfort
found
opinion
though
excuse
failure
apply
martinez
interpretive
principle
rule
sixth
amendment
challenges
sentences
upheld
reasonable
facts
encompassed
jury
verdict
guilty
plea
ante
ante
stevens
joined
ginsburg
concurring
bothered
frame
objections
constitutional
analysis
undertaken
four
conceivable
candidates
simplistic
objection
sixth
amendment
violated
facts
made
legally
necessary
decision
appellate
courts
rather
decision
congress
rebuttal
errs
premise
conclusion
premise
wrong
according
remedial
majority
booker
facts
excessiveness
review
renders
legally
essential
made
congress
reasonableness
standard
review
implicitly
contained
within
ed
supp
iv
see
booker
supra
sixth
amendment
violated
even
appellate
courts
really
exercising
type
power
prescribe
facts
legally
necessary
support
specific
sentences
neither
apprendi
progeny
suggests
violation
sixth
amendment
depends
upon
branch
government
made
prescription
contrary
booker
flatly
rejected
argument
mandatory
guidelines
constitutional
sentencing
commission
rather
congress
specified
facts
essential
punishment
see
good
reason
sixth
amendment
reservation
jury
power
blakely
makes
difference
whether
legislature
sentencing
commission
appellate
usurps
jury
prerogative
otherwise
prescribe
reasonable
sentences
consistent
mandatory
guidelines
booker
invalidated
california
effectively
reverse
decision
cunningham
simply
setting
aside
unreasonable
sentence
conform
california
law
next
objection
minimizes
extent
excessiveness
review
makes
facts
legally
essential
punishment
appellate
courts
uphold
based
facts
found
jury
district
decision
impose
lengthiest
sentences
number
sentences
legally
dependent
facts
quite
small
thus
argument
goes
reason
prohibit
substantive
reasonableness
review
altogether
absent
claim
review
creates
constitutional
problem
given
case
prohibit
already
explained
line
defense
inconsistent
established
principles
statutory
interpretation
see
supra
even
terms
defense
inconsistent
booker
reasonableness
review
improper
inadequate
remedial
scheme
unless
ensures
facts
never
legally
necessary
justify
sentence
imposed
advisory
guidelines
mandatory
guidelines
system
invalidated
booker
attribute
producing
unconstitutional
results
small
proportion
cases
guilty
pleas
guidelines
ranges
depend
facts
overwhelming
majority
sentences
imposed
federal
system
perfectly
accord
sixth
amendment
see
booker
stevens
dissenting
part
booker
nevertheless
excised
key
statutory
provisions
governing
federal
sentencing
order
eliminate
constitutional
violations
entirely
system
accomplish
goal
right
supplanted
congressionally
enacted
mandatory
guidelines
true
sentences
today
system
still
violate
sixth
amendment
nonetheless
allowing
system
go
forward
produce
chaos
cases
resemble
stylized
hypotheticals
ordinarily
defendants
judges
unable
figure
based
comparison
facts
case
facts
previously
decided
appellate
cases
whether
sentence
imposed
upheld
reasonable
based
facts
supporting
jury
verdict
guilty
plea
stop
defendants
making
argument
however
certainly
foreclosed
trying
see
supra
judges
theory
two
options
create
complicated
charts
databases
based
appellate
precedents
ascertain
facts
legally
essential
justify
sentences
turn
deaf
ear
claims
though
knowing
full
well
justified
bet
things
better
mandatory
guidelines
system
every
judge
readily
identify
sixth
amendment
violated
rule
accordingly
proponents
substantive
reasonableness
review
next
argue
actual
sentencing
involves
consideration
dozens
different
facts
order
make
individualized
determination
defendant
real
world
contend
difficult
impossible
determine
whether
given
fact
legally
essential
punishment
imposed
identifying
particular
fatal
fact
necessary
identifying
constitutional
violation
second
hypothetical
given
example
possible
say
single
fact
combination
facts
sufficed
bring
sentence
within
bounds
reasonable
possible
say
indeed
must
said
fact
combination
facts
effect
suffices
establish
sixth
amendment
violation
whether
judge
authority
impose
enhanced
sentence
depends
finding
specified
fact
one
several
specified
facts
aggravating
fact
remains
case
jury
verdict
alone
authorize
sentence
judge
acquires
authority
upon
finding
additional
fact
blakely
supra
last
conceivable
defense
wrap
mantle
history
tradition
hen
practice
expressly
prohibited
text
bill
rights
bears
endorsement
long
tradition
open
widespread
unchallenged
use
dates
back
beginning
republic
proper
basis
striking
venerable
accepted
tradition
laid
examining
table
scrutinized
conformity
abstract
principle
constitutional
adjudication
devised
contrary
traditions
stuff
principles
formed
rutan
republican
party
scalia
dissenting
omitted
consideration
application
federal
system
prior
sra
substantive
appellate
review
district
sentencing
discretion
essentially
exist
see
dorszynski
noting
general
proposition
determined
sentence
within
limitations
set
forth
statute
imposed
appellate
review
end
doctrine
bars
review
exercise
sentencing
discretion
state
appellate
review
sentences
late
least
permit
appellate
courts
modify
sentences
imposed
within
statutory
limits
see
appellate
review
sentences
symposium
judicial
conference
appeals
second
circuit
exaggeration
say
history
reflects
established
understanding
appellate
review
excessive
sentences
conflicts
sixth
amendment
also
exaggeration
say
historical
pedigree
substantive
appellate
review
sentencing
strong
clear
overcome
basic
principle
underlying
right
applied
apprendi
blakely
booker
cunningham
final
defense
substantive
reasonableness
review
invoke
intent
congress
booker
remedial
opinion
congressional
intent
course
congress
intended
facts
legally
essential
punishment
imposed
whole
reason
mandatory
guidelines
violated
sixth
amendment
indulge
newfound
respect
unconstitutional
congressional
intent
reimpose
mandatory
guidelines
system
system
creates
today
manages
contravene
congressional
intent
sixth
amendment
intent
booker
remedial
opinion
opinion
purported
divining
congressional
intent
light
sixth
amendment
compelled
see
absent
explanation
substantive
reasonableness
review
cause
facts
justify
greater
punishment
jury
verdict
defendant
guilty
plea
sustain
fail
understand
review
possibly
intended
five
justices
composed
booker
remedial
majority
least
one
intend
override
blakely
render
academic
entire
first
part
booker
confirmed
majority
booker
revision
blakely
essayed
justice
alito
cunningham
dissent
cunningham
slip
opinion
ginsburg
ii
abandoning
substantive
reasonableness
review
require
return
regime
booker
remedial
opinion
sought
avoid
see
said
outset
believe
possible
give
effect
booker
remedial
opinion
purposes
sought
serve
still
avoiding
constitutional
defect
identified
booker
merits
opinion
specifically
limit
reasonableness
review
sentencing
procedures
mandated
statute
central
feature
booker
remedial
opinion
conclusion
sra
completely
inseverable
see
result
sentencing
commission
remains
place
writing
guidelines
collecting
information
actual
district
sentencing
decisions
undertaking
research
revising
guidelines
accordingly
likewise
sentencing
courts
remain
obligated
consider
various
factors
delineated
supp
iv
including
guidelines
range
still
instructed
subsection
impose
sentence
sufficient
greater
necessary
comply
purposes
set
forth
paragraph
subsection
significantly
ed
supp
iv
continues
require
district
courts
give
reasons
sentencing
decisions
requirement
requisite
detail
depends
whether
sentence
within
advisory
guidelines
range
within
advisory
guidelines
range
spans
months
outside
advisory
guidelines
range
explanations
turn
help
commission
revise
advisory
guidelines
reflect
actual
sentencing
practices
consistent
statutory
goals
see
booker
supra
citing
ed
supp
iv
booker
retention
statutory
procedural
provisions
furthered
congressional
purpose
iron
ing
sentencing
differences
avoid
ing
excessive
sentencing
disparities
important
appellate
courts
police
observance
booker
excised
provision
sra
containing
standards
appellate
review
see
invalidating
ed
supp
iv
remedial
majority
creation
reasonableness
review
gave
appellate
courts
necessary
means
reverse
district
appears
considered
considers
impermissible
factors
selects
sentence
based
clearly
erroneous
facts
comply
requirement
statement
addition
direct
effect
sentencing
uniformity
procedural
review
indirectly
produce
time
reduction
sentencing
disparities
ensuring
district
courts
give
reasons
sentences
specific
reasons
decline
follow
advisory
guidelines
range
see
supp
iv
appellate
courts
enable
sentencing
commission
perform
function
revising
guidelines
reflect
desirable
sentencing
practices
district
courts
see
booker
supra
citing
ed
supp
iv
occurs
district
courts
less
reason
depart
commission
recommendations
leading
sentencing
one
possible
objection
procedural
review
booker
remedial
opinion
appears
considered
supp
iv
limits
appellate
courts
reversing
sentences
imposed
violation
law
result
incorrect
application
sentencing
guidelines
fall
certain
categories
either
high
low
noted
booker
inextricably
intertwined
excised
provisions
setting
forth
standards
appellate
review
nonsensical
continue
apply
provisions
governing
decision
disposition
appeals
clearly
track
standards
see
scalia
dissenting
part
hold
incapable
functioning
independently
provisions
excised
booker
thus
inseverable
see
alaska
airlines
brock
singer
sutherland
statutes
statutory
construction
ed
even
part
act
independent
valid
parts
substantively
invalid
separate
function
perform
independent
invalid
portions
act
also
held
invalid
applying
procedural
review
case
require
much
discussion
part
join
part
iii
opinion
see
ante
decision
today
leaves
unexplained
mandatory
guidelines
unconstitutional
system
contains
potential
sixth
amendment
violation
irresponsible
leave
patent
inconsistency
hanging
air
threatening
future
yet
another
major
revision
guidelines
practices
district
courts
courts
appeals
adjust
procedural
review
lay
matter
rest
comporting
parts
booker
opinion
achieving
maximum
degree
sentencing
uniformity
basis
facts
constitution
permits
victor
rita
petitioner
writ
certiorari
appeals
fourth
circuit
june
justice
souter
dissenting
applying
sixth
amendment
current
sentencing
law
gotten
complicated
someone
coming
cold
case
might
wonder
reached
point
general
overview
course
decisions
past
eight
years
may
help
put
today
holding
perspective
members
criminal
jury
guaranteed
impartial
residents
state
district
crime
sixth
amendment
right
trial
jury
otherwise
relies
history
details
practical
instincts
judges
legislators
implementation
courts
litigation
example
worked
issues
size
see
ballew
georgia
prohibiting
state
juries
allowing
juries
six
unanimity
see
apodaca
oregon
allowing
nonunanimous
juries
state
criminal
trials
burch
louisiana
prohibiting
nonunanimous
juries
decisions
go
william
james
called
constitution
guarantee
see
james
pragmatism
new
name
old
ways
thinking
ed
one
additional
issue
detail
implementation
line
judge
jury
determining
facts
particular
legitimate
extent
factfinding
judge
sentencing
defendant
guilty
plea
jury
verdict
guilty
since
inception
judicial
discretion
determining
sentence
judges
acted
learn
course
trial
later
gather
presentence
report
evidence
time
sentencing
including
details
trial
jury
may
found
true
returned
guilty
verdict
answered
special
question
historically
also
customary
judicial
use
extraverdict
facts
deciding
sentence
within
range
set
advance
statute
defining
crime
question
see
williams
new
york
thus
traditionally
judge
imposed
sentence
point
range
say
years
specified
statute
offense
every
fact
necessary
go
high
five
years
found
jury
admitted
even
though
jury
made
particular
implicit
findings
facts
judge
might
consider
exercising
discretion
set
sentence
higher
lower
within
range
background
jones
called
attention
serious
threat
practical
value
criminal
defendant
jury
right
jones
prosecuted
statute
exemplified
growing
practice
providing
definition
penalty
basic
crime
subject
right
jury
trial
identifying
variants
carrying
higher
ranges
penalties
depending
facts
arguably
might
found
judge
sitting
alone
thus
jones
convicted
solely
carjacking
fact
causing
bodily
shown
maximum
penalty
jumped
years
quoting
supp
government
position
extra
fact
serious
bodily
injury
raising
penalty
range
required
jury
finding
condition
imposing
enhanced
sentence
judge
element
serious
crime
subject
right
jury
determination
see
jones
unsettling
argument
prosecutions
statutory
schemes
serious
issue
case
might
well
guilt
innocence
basic
offense
liability
substantially
enhanced
penalty
example
judge
found
jones
caused
serious
bodily
injury
death
extraverdict
factfinding
made
difference
years
life
imprisonment
quoting
supp
case
like
giving
judges
exclusive
power
find
facts
necessary
sentence
higher
range
make
jury
mere
gatekeeper
important
trial
judge
alone
sixth
amendment
course
speak
expressly
scheme
sufficient
reason
give
constitutional
approval
judicial
factfinding
necessary
enhanced
sentencing
range
held
adequate
face
defendant
objection
defendant
right
jury
standing
power
government
curtail
liberty
take
previously
unsuspected
modesty
jones
accordingly
treated
practice
suspect
enough
call
applying
doctrine
constitutional
avoidance
interpreted
statute
question
government
called
mere
condition
imposing
sentencing
enhancement
treated
element
serious
offense
made
subject
jury
factfinding
interpretation
obviated
constitutional
decision
whether
subjecting
unwilling
defendant
onerous
range
sentence
facts
found
solely
judge
violate
sixth
amendment
issue
go
away
jones
constitutional
challenge
soon
presented
inescapably
apprendi
new
jersey
held
exposing
defendant
increased
penalty
beyond
range
basic
crime
based
facts
determined
exclusively
judge
violated
sixth
amendment
absence
jury
waiver
defendant
subjected
penalty
serious
one
authorized
facts
found
jury
admitted
defendant
judge
constitutionally
determine
facts
exercising
discretion
sentencing
point
fact
raised
range
possible
penalties
functioned
like
element
serious
offense
even
statute
ostensibly
tied
fact
sentence
alone
hence
absence
waiver
sentence
weightier
range
imposed
judge
enhancing
fact
found
beyond
reasonable
doubt
trial
jury
ibid
placing
disputed
factfinding
judicial
limits
effect
raise
range
possible
sentences
made
practical
judgment
maintained
historical
judicial
role
finding
facts
relevant
sentencing
within
range
set
jury
verdict
recognized
jury
right
trivialized
beyond
recognition
traditional
practice
extended
point
judge
alone
objection
find
fact
necessary
raise
upper
limit
sentencing
range
moment
apprendi
drew
line
however
holding
carried
apparent
implications
regime
guidelines
sentencing
adopted
see
sentencing
reform
act
stat
et
seq
ed
supp
iv
et
seq
ed
supp
iv
general
object
guidelines
sentencing
eminently
laudable
one
promoting
substantial
consistency
exercising
judicial
discretion
sentence
within
range
set
statute
given
crime
thus
elementary
level
guidelines
law
limits
sentence
judge
may
impose
even
within
sentencing
range
provided
statute
creating
particular
offense
effect
divides
basic
sentencing
range
subranges
assigns
offender
subrange
based
particular
facts
case
offender
criminal
history
judge
may
depart
assigned
subrange
case
presents
circumstance
adequately
taken
consideration
sentencing
commission
formulating
guidelines
supp
iv
follows
judge
must
find
facts
beyond
necessary
jury
guilty
verdict
sentence
matter
subrange
designated
offender
comparable
criminal
history
whose
case
presents
relevant
facts
beyond
formal
elements
crime
result
hybrid
sentencing
practice
one
describe
emphasizing
judge
factfinding
never
increase
sentence
beyond
range
set
law
defining
crime
one
stress
principal
motivation
guidelines
sentencing
eliminating
traditional
judicial
discretion
forbidding
judge
impose
high
sentence
except
basis
fact
beyond
necessary
guilty
verdict
thus
subject
right
jury
determination
blakely
washington
considering
state
sentencing
system
similar
federal
scheme
decided
latter
way
looking
made
sense
apprendi
going
mean
something
preserving
historical
significance
jury
see
held
additional
factfinding
necessary
judge
sentence
within
high
subrange
comparable
finding
additional
fact
required
judge
impose
enhanced
sentence
law
considered
apprendi
blakely
come
way
significance
apprendi
jeopardy
legislature
free
bypass
apprendi
providing
abnormally
spacious
sentencing
range
basic
crime
theoretically
exposing
defendant
highest
sentence
jury
guilty
verdict
leaving
judge
make
supplementary
findings
appropriate
necessary
sentence
subrange
high
end
spell
end
apprendi
diminish
real
significance
jury
protection
apprendi
shored
booker
majority
applied
blakely
reasoning
held
federal
guidelines
subjected
defendants
unconstitutional
sentences
upper
subranges
absent
jury
finding
waiver
far
good
sixth
amendment
issue
remedy
step
consistency
began
falter
statutory
guidelines
survive
two
serious
alternatives
one
already
place
courts
foresight
apply
apprendi
guidelines
require
additional
facts
necessary
possible
high
subrange
sentence
charged
submitted
jury
true
government
think
ahead
charge
relevant
facts
emerged
unexpectedly
trial
mandatory
character
guidelines
preserved
goal
consistency
continue
served
practical
value
jury
right
face
erosion
second
remedial
alternative
declaration
guidelines
mandatory
discretionary
finding
extraverdict
facts
strictly
necessary
sentencing
high
subrange
guidelines
alternative
judge
found
subsidiary
fact
specified
condition
high
subrange
sentence
might
decide
impose
low
sentence
independently
guidelines
provisions
downward
departure
judge
found
fact
might
sentence
within
high
subrange
reasons
seemed
sufficient
guidelines
mandatory
subsidiary
fact
merely
provided
one
reasoned
basis
traditional
exercise
discretion
sentence
high
end
sentencing
range
provided
statute
defining
crime
second
alternative
simple
raised
yet
issues
reconfigured
majority
fact
adopted
see
guaranteed
case
us
district
judges
treated
guidelines
simply
worthy
consideration
open
rejection
given
case
booker
remedy
threaten
return
old
sentencing
regime
presumably
produce
apparent
disuniformity
convinced
congress
adopt
guidelines
sentencing
first
place
sentencing
judges
attributed
substantial
gravitational
pull
guidelines
treated
guidelines
result
persuasive
presumptively
appropriate
booker
remedy
practical
terms
preserve
feature
guidelines
threatened
trivialize
jury
right
presumption
guidelines
reasonableness
tend
produce
guidelines
sentences
almost
regularly
mandatory
guidelines
done
judges
finding
facts
needed
sentence
upper
subrange
open
door
undermining
apprendi
happened
today
without
powerful
reason
risk
reversal
sentence
district
judge
faced
evidence
supporting
high
subrange
guidelines
sentence
appropriate
factfinding
disparagement
jury
right
sentence
within
high
subrange
prediction
weakened
whit
description
reasonableness
appellate
presumption
ante
emphasis
deleted
works
appeal
determines
works
trial
sentencing
commission
views
weighty
says
see
ante
trial
judge
find
far
easier
make
appropriate
findings
sentence
within
appropriate
guideline
go
unorthodox
factfinding
necessary
justify
sentence
outside
guidelines
range
see
supp
iv
upshot
today
decision
moves
threat
practical
value
sixth
amendment
jury
right
closer
flagged
jones
seems
fair
ask
accomplished
real
terms
judicial
labor
imposed
apprendi
associated
cases
taking
booker
remedy
discretionary
guidelines
given
however
way
avoid
risk
apprendi
jury
right
hold
discretionary
sentence
carries
presumption
reasonableness
sentencing
decisions
reviewed
according
standard
reasonableness
whether
fall
within
guidelines
range
district
courts
assured
entire
sentencing
range
set
statute
available
see
booker
supra
calling
reasonableness
standard
across
board
stop
replicating
unconstitutional
system
imposing
sentences
within
guidelines
ranges
determined
facts
found
alone
therefore
reject
presumption
reasonableness
adopted
case
pernicious
think
recognize
presumption
still
retain
full
effect
apprendi
aid
sixth
amendment
guarantee
stop
rejecting
presumption
neither
preferred
course
choice
today
majority
avoid
odds
degree
intent
congress
question
congress
meant
impose
mandatory
guidelines
means
bringing
greater
uniformity
sentencing
point
congressional
objective
still
attained
booker
remedial
holding
means
congress
restore
scheme
mind
way
gives
full
measure
right
jury
trial
congress
change
heart
value
guidelines
system
reenact
guidelines
law
give
binding
force
originally
provision
jury
judicial
determination
fact
necessary
sentence
within
upper
guidelines
subrange
point
congress
make
good
enacted
policy
mandatory
guidelines
sentencing
guarantee
robust
right
jury
trial
respectfully
footnotes
see
opinion
stevens
never
doubted
authority
judge
exercise
broad
discretion
imposing
sentence
within
statutory
range
indeed
everyone
agrees
constitutional
issues
presented
cases
avoided
entirely
congress
omitted
sentencing
reform
act
provisions
make
guidelines
binding
district
judges
citations
omitted
fact
booker
expressly
equated
new
reasonableness
standard
old
standard
used
review
sentencing
departures
see
standards
foreign
sentencing
law
act
long
required
use
important
sentencing
circumstances
review
departures
see
ed
review
sentences
imposed
applicable
guideline
see
emphasis
added
see
also
breyer
federal
sentencing
guidelines
key
compromises
upon
rest
hofstra
rev
commission
extensively
debated
offender
characteristics
make
difference
sentencing
characteristics
important
enough
warrant
formal
reflection
within
guidelines
constitute
possible
grounds
departure
eventually
light
arguments
based
part
considerations
fairness
part
uncertainty
sentencing
judge
actually
account
aggravating
mitigating
factors
current
offender
characteristics
rules
look
primarily
past
records
convictions
footnotes
omitted
footnotes
course
may
fact
racial
animus
also
sufficed
sustain
increased
sentence
undeniable
case
hand
judicial
finding
racial
animus
filled
role
see
blakely
washington
similar
reasons
recognize
sixth
amendment
problem
reasonableness
review
created
lack
district
discretion
impose
high
sentences
since
eliminating
discretion
impose
low
sentences
equivalent
judicially
creating
mandatory
minimums
concern
sixth
amendment
see
harris
since
reasonableness
review
function
ratchet
booker
must
forswear
notion
sentences
low
light
need
abandon
concept
sentences
high
reason
join
justice
souter
dissent
wishes
give
district
courts
assurance
entire
sentencing
range
set
statute
available
post
proper
goal
indeed
essential
one
prevent
booker
remedy
effectively
overturning
apprendi
blakely
eliminating
presumption
reasonableness
achieve
circuits
already
decline
employ
presumption
sentence
never
reversed
substantively
excessive
brief
new
york
council
defense
lawyers
amicus
curiae
refuting
belief
mere
elimination
presumption
destroy
gravitational
pull
post
souter
dissenting
stay
safely
within
guidelines
way
assure
district
courts
deviate
advisory
guidelines
ensure
facts
never
legally
essential
sentence
prohibit
appellate
courts
reviewing
substantive
sentencing
choices
made
district
courts
suggests
reliance
hypotheticals
indicates
interpretation
reasonableness
create
multitude
constitutional
problems
ante
see
also
ante
stevens
concurring
setting
aside
question
whether
volume
constitutional
violations
relevance
application
martinez
interpretive
principle
wrong
think
constitutional
problem
today
opinion
ignores
hypothetical
merely
used
hypotheticals
describe
real
advisory
guidelines
sentences
routinely
change
months
years
imprisonment
decades
centuries
basis
facts
booker
recognized
see
citing
inter
alia
case
defendant
sentence
increased
months
years
perhaps
cynical
least
one
conscientious
district
judge
decided
shoulder
burden
ascertaining
maximum
reasonable
sentence
case
based
verdict
appellate
precedent
correctly
concluding
way
eliminate
sixth
amendment
problems
cunningham
booker
mandates
substantive
reasonableness
review
see
griffin
wl
june
young
sentencing
memorandum
substance
procedure
admittedly
terms
see
sun
oil
wortman
text
indicates
use
term
procedure
includes
limiting
sentencing
factors
permissible
ones
opposed
using
permissible
factors
reaching
result
substantively
wrong
therefore
disagree
justice
stevens
district
discriminates
yankees
fans
acting
procedurally
impeccable
way
ante
concurring
opinion
courts
must
resist
however
temptation
make
procedural
review
stringent
substantive
review
table
judicial
role
conducting
severability
analysis
limited
determining
whether
balance
statute
contains
unconstitutional
provision
capable
functioning
independently
alaska
airlines
brock
courts
power
add
provisions
might
desirable
certain
provisions
excised
thus
engaging
reasonableness
review
determine
whether
district
complied
various
procedures
appellate
subject
district
greater
requirements
existed
say
possible
one
claim
failure
comply
procedural
requirements
results
sentence
imposed
violation
law
thereby
covered
applicability
procedural
errors
called
question
specifically
addresses
sentences
district
failed
provide
required
statement
reasons
mandated
reasons
specified
text
however
see
need
grapple
proper
interpretation
footnotes
recognized
single
exception
rule
permitting
reliance
fact
prior
conviction
without
jury
determination
defendant
previously
convicted
see
apprendi
see
also
ask
appeals
review
sentence
reasonableness
without
resort
presumption
reach
issues
case