1996-03-08 - Re: Another Motivation for the CDA (Federal Sentencing Guid

Header Data

From: “Deranged Mutant” <WlkngOwl@UNiX.asb.com>
To: tj_lists@prado.com
Message Hash: 102e627c9df82e39f8158e131bcb8187844c846d02ee1b630b1469ff158c0999
Message ID: <199603080737.CAA10760@UNiX.asb.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-03-08 10:17:29 UTC
Raw Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 18:17:29 +0800

Raw message

From: "Deranged Mutant" <WlkngOwl@UNiX.asb.com>
Date: Fri, 8 Mar 1996 18:17:29 +0800
To: tj_lists@prado.com
Subject: Re: Another Motivation for the CDA (Federal Sentencing Guid
Message-ID: <199603080737.CAA10760@UNiX.asb.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


tj_lists@prado.com wrote:

> Couldn't help noticing this, presume you mean Federal Judges since the
> waiver would be from aspects of GCA 1968, a Federal law. The fact is, at
> least in sentencing, Federal Judges now have very little discretion. The
> Federal Sentencing Guideline structure established in the 1980's provides
> "guidelines" for a given defendant convicted of a given set of charges. Things

That aside, in running trials and in many other little things both 
federal and non-federal judges have too much leeway in deciding what 
evidence can be admitted, in some of the sentencing details and in 
various forms of punishment and restitution, etc.

But yes, you made a good reminder point about mandatory sentencing.

 
Rob. 

---
Send a blank message with the subject "send pgp-key" (not in
quotes) to <WlkngOwl@unix.asb.com> for a copy of my PGP key.





Thread