Tuesday, November 13, 2007

 

Sentencing issues are breaking out all over!

The lethal injection of turkeys aside, sentencing issues are rising to the fore in the popular press. The front page of the Washington Post today carried this story, reporting on the hearings today on the issue of whether or not the change in the crack guidelines (lowering sentences) will be made retroactive. Most of us in the field are guessing (and hoping) that the Sentencing Commission will make the change retroactive; to do otherwise would expose the Commission to charges of racism. When the Commission lowered the guidelines for marijuana, LSD, and OxyContin-- all drugs found in the hands of predominantly white defendants-- they made those changes retroactive.

Of course, we also have the rough equivalent of a national stay on executions pending the Baze case in the Supreme Court. That is likely to be the next big story in criminal law.

Comments:
Great progress! And interesting that the highest number of convictions--and probably reduced sentences-- came from the eastern half of Virginia. Does that mean there was more crack there, or tougher prosecution?
 
And I think that's the first time I've heard the Washington Post referred to as "the popular press." I know . . . in comparison to the sentencing blogosphere . . . but still it's amusing.
 
The Washington Post is the sixth largest circulating newspaper in the nation with an average circulation of 929, 921 on its Sunday edition. For Example the NYT has a circulation average of 1,627,062. I think it is pretty mainstream.

Love,
Matt
 
Sorry to change subjects - but thank you for getting out the PR grades so quickly.

Any chance you could encourage GRP and JW to follow your lead? Their tests were scantron as well. The parental units kind of want to know if graduation is still on track so they can buy airline tickets and stuff.
 
Anon 8:52 -

Uh thanks. I'd just as soon not know!

Let's put it off for a while... please?
 
Post a Comment



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

#