Highly-regarded Circuit Judges Richard Posner and Frank Easterbrook of the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals wrote the majority and dissenting opinions in this recent decision (U.S. v. Booker) interpreting the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in U.S. v. Blakely.
In Blakely, the Supreme Court held that judges cannot increase a defendant’s sentence under the state of Washington’s sentencing guidelines based on facts and behavior that were not presented to a jury. Some sentencing guideline specialists believe that Blakely could affect the guidelines under the federal system.
In the Seventh Circuit decision, Judge Posner leans toward the position that the entire federal sentencing scheme is history because Blakely eviscerates the sentencing enhancements under the scheme. Judge Easterbrook is more cautious in interpreting the effect of Blakely. Hat tip to Southern Appeal for the link to this decision on a legal issue that is affecting many white collar criminal prosecutions, such as the sad case of Jamie Olis.
By the way, a relatively new blawg — Sentencing Law and Policy by Professor Douglas A. Berman of the Ohio State University Law School — is providing excellent commentary and insight on Blakely, Booker and other decisions that are affecting this important area of the law, particularly given the sledgehammer approach that the Justice Department is increasingly taking in white collar criminal prosecutions.