InTheWeeds

Blakely, Booker, Fanfan

I am a bit out of my normal relm here, but this one is critical so I need to get it out.

With all the other things that are loading our attention time these days, from the tragedy in Asia to Iraq, to Barbara Boxer's off the planet election invalidation nonsense there is another item of infrastructure that a few know well, but many know nothing of.

If you believe in the Law, and Justice (and I do) then you need to know that in the next month there may be a complete melt down of the federal courts system which will bring a certain amount of chaos in this country.

In June of 2004 there was a case in the Supreme Court called Blakely vs Washington (the state of) in which the Court said that the sentencing was unconstitutional. Now hold your horses here, not all sentencing but a specific kind. When someone either is convicted of or pleads guilty to a charge then there are guidlines for sentencing on that charge.

What happened in Blakely (and happens throughout the Federal system) is that the prosecutors do a pre-sentencing investigation and find other things, like drugs were found with the accused, or that they resisted arrest, or other items that make the situation worse and then recommend that the judge take that into consideration when sentencing. That consideration is to add time because the accused did more bad stuff so to speak. These other items are called enhancements in the federal system. So most judges have been adding extra sentencing time because of these enhancements.

The Supreme Court said these 'enhancements' are unconstitutional because the addional 'bad stuff' has to be validated, meaning that a jury must convict of those additional charges or the accused has to plead guilty to those charges before they can be used as a basis for sentencing. In other words, if an accused pleads guilty to bank robbery, then the sentencing can only be for the bank robbery. Not for and extra large amount of money, or someone was roughed up or there were drugs involved or they carried a weapon. Unless of course the accused is convicted of those additional things or pleads guilty to those additional things on top of the bank robbery.

Now the chaos, Blakely vs Washington involved a state's sentencing guidelines. Two cases are now in the Supreme Court (Booker and Fanfan) which are to be decided in first month or two of 2005 to see if the same decision will apply to the federal courts sentencing system. It is expected that the Court will apply the Blakely rationale to Booker and Fanfan. (For those of you who like to research check Apprendi v New Jersey as well).

If that decision is made as expected it is estimated by several legal blogs that as many as 600,000 cases may be effected. Up to 62,000 sentences are given out annually in the federal system and the guidlines with enhancements has been used since 1987. So do the numbers. This decision could back up the federal courts for years. As many as 100,000 current inmates of the federal system have ALREADY filed for there sentences to be reviewed even before the decision is taken just on the basis of Blakely.

This may be nothing to the average person, but if the federal court system gets flooded by this situation new cases will languish or inmates that should be or should not be released may or may not be. Just the individual review of as many as a half a million sentences is such a monumental task that it is incomprehensible on an individual basis.

The Congress and the Executive branches must work with the Federal Judiciary and come up with some sort of solution process, or law and justice in the federal system of this country may come to a halt.

livingthedream.

posted by livingthedream @ 8:30 AM