{
  "id": "RL32766",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL32766",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com, University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 346117,
      "date": "2009-03-16",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T02:40:06.459361",
      "title": "Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Background, Legal Analysis, and Policy Options",
      "summary": "Historically, the way in which convicted offenders are sentenced falls under one of two penal policies\u2014indeterminate and determinate sentences. Indeterminate sentencing practices were predominant for several decades, leading up to the major reform efforts undertaken by many states and the federal government in the mid- to-late 1970s and early 1980s. The perceived failure of the indeterminate system to \u201ccure\u201d the criminal, coupled with renewed concern about the rising crime rate throughout the nation in the mid-1970s, resulted in wide experimentation with sentencing systems by many states and the creation of sentencing guidelines at the federal level. In 1984, Congress passed a sentencing reform measure, which abolished indeterminate sentencing at the federal level and created a determinate sentencing structure through the federal sentencing guidelines. The Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 reformed the federal sentencing system by (1) dropping rehabilitation as one of the goals of punishment; (2) creating the U.S. Sentencing Commission and charging it with establishing sentencing guidelines; (3) making all federal sentences determinate; and (4) authorizing appellate review of sentences.\nIn United States v. Booker (Booker), an unusual two-part opinion transformed federal criminal sentencing by restoring to judges much of the discretion that Congress took away when it put mandatory sentencing guidelines in place. In the first opinion, the United States Supreme Court held that the mandatory sentencing guidelines violated defendants\u2019 Sixth Amendment right to a trial by jury by giving judges the power to make factual findings that increased sentences beyond the maximum that the jury\u2019s finding alone would support. In the second part, a different majority concluded that the constitutional deficiency could be remedied if the guidelines were treated as discretionary or advisory rather than mandatory. As a result of the decisions, the Court struck down a provision in law that made the federal sentencing guidelines mandatory as well as a provision that permitted appellate review of departures from the guidelines. In essence, the high Court\u2019s ruling gives federal judges discretion in sentencing offenders by not requiring them to adhere to the guidelines; rather, the guidelines can be used by judges on an advisory basis.\nIn light of the Court ruling in Booker and subsequent cases, the issue for Congress is whether to amend current law to require federal judges to follow guided sentences, or permit federal judges to use their discretion in sentencing under certain circumstances. Congressional options include (1) maintain the sentencing guidelines by specifying mandatory minimum sentences and increasing the top of each guideline range to a statutory maximum for specified offenses (hence, codify specified sentencing ranges that are in the guidelines); (2) require jury trials for any enhancement factor that would increase the sentence for which the defendant did not waive his or her rights; or (3) take no action, thus permitting judicial discretion in sentencing in cases where Congress has not specified mandatory sentences.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/RL32766",
          "sha1": "7b00406f2f53588b49fb56cd8a2253bd4a348ebf",
          "filename": "files/20090316_RL32766_7b00406f2f53588b49fb56cd8a2253bd4a348ebf.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL32766",
          "sha1": "53fd2d15dbbbddf179a847479b463cdab8e867ef",
          "filename": "files/20090316_RL32766_53fd2d15dbbbddf179a847479b463cdab8e867ef.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc806079/",
      "id": "RL32766_2007Dec13",
      "date": "2007-12-13",
      "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26",
      "title": "Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Background, Legal Analysis, and Policy Options",
      "summary": null,
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20071213_RL32766_a65cd71a2630f49c8754ef31800fc6ccb4032d5d.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20071213_RL32766_a65cd71a2630f49c8754ef31800fc6ccb4032d5d.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc808155/",
      "id": "RL32766_2007Jun30",
      "date": "2007-06-30",
      "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26",
      "title": "Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Background, Legal Analysis, and Policy Options",
      "summary": null,
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20070630_RL32766_2e05ebd502ff75064833f6443ca77191c6d95441.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20070630_RL32766_2e05ebd502ff75064833f6443ca77191c6d95441.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc847666/",
      "id": "RL32766_2005Apr04",
      "date": "2005-04-04",
      "retrieved": "2016-06-02T05:26:07",
      "title": "Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Background, Legal Analysis, and Policy Options",
      "summary": "This report provides a summary of U.S. penal policy at the federal level. The report then discusses legislation that created the current federal sentencing structure, the different types of sentencing guidelines, and analyses of departures from the guidelines under the federal system and of possible policy options the 109th Congress may wish to consider if it chooses to address this issue.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20050404_RL32766_b06ee41975d10e15e195b2466b11463b1fbf3a78.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20050404_RL32766_b06ee41975d10e15e195b2466b11463b1fbf3a78.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": [
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Criminal justice",
          "name": "Criminal justice"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Sentences (Criminal procedure)",
          "name": "Sentences (Criminal procedure)"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Sentencing guidelines",
          "name": "Sentencing guidelines"
        },
        {
          "source": "LIV",
          "id": "Mandatory sentences",
          "name": "Mandatory sentences"
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "source": "University of North Texas Libraries Government Documents Department",
      "sourceLink": "https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc817939/",
      "id": "RL32766_2005Feb09",
      "date": "2005-02-09",
      "retrieved": "2016-03-19T13:57:26",
      "title": "Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Background, Legal Analysis, and Policy Options",
      "summary": null,
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORT",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "filename": "files/20050209_RL32766_745c8bd239ed75102af9d1f89c7005a1a317abd0.pdf"
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20050209_RL32766_745c8bd239ed75102af9d1f89c7005a1a317abd0.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "American Law",
    "Constitutional Questions"
  ]
}