HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SUPPORT WLF

Case Detail


Claiborne v. United States; Rita v. United States
On June 21, 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that a sentence imposed within the range set by the harsh federal sentencing guidelines may be regarded as presumptively reasonable by a reviewing court of appeals. The 8-1 decision written by Justice Stephen Breyer emphasized, however, that courts of appeals are not mandated to regard a guideline sentence as presumptively reasonable. District courts, while they must consider the guidelines in imposing a sentence, need not regard them as presumptively reasonable either. The Court did not address the issue of sentences imposed below the guideline sentence, having dismissed the related Claiborne case as moot, but will address the issue in the fall in Gall v. United States.
Case Status:
Loss.
More Information and Downloads:
12/18/2006: Download the Brief

  • Welcome to the Washington Legal Foundation
  • 2009 Massachusetts Ave., NW
    Washington, DC 20036
  • info@wlf.org  |  ph. 202-588-0302
    ©2017 WLF All Rights Reserved