Judicial discretion in federal sentencing

This article examines policy implications of Jeffery T. Ulmer, Michael T. Light and John H. Kramer's article "Racial disparity in the wake of the Booker/Fanfan decision: An alternative analysis to the USSC's 2010 report" (same journal issue). The author concurs with the policy re...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Criminology & public policy 2011-11, Vol.10 (4), p.1151-1155
Main Author: Albonetti, Celesta A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Criminal justice
Decisions
Discretion
Federal government
Sentences (law)
Sentencing
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This article examines policy implications of Jeffery T. Ulmer, Michael T. Light and John H. Kramer's article "Racial disparity in the wake of the Booker/Fanfan decision: An alternative analysis to the USSC's 2010 report" (same journal issue). The author concurs with the policy recommendations of Ulmer et al., stating there is no need to institute statutory remedies for sentences that do not greatly differ from those imposed under pre-Booker mandatory guidelines structure. Adapted from the source document.
ISSN:1538-6473
1745-9133
DOI:10.1111/j.1745-9133.2011.00772.x