In the News

January 26, 2009: US Supreme Court Rules Trial Courts Can't Presume Guidelines are Reasonable

In a strongly worded opinion from the United States Supreme Court, published on January 26, 2009, the Court made it clear that even when a sentence falls within the range of months suggested by the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, trial courts may not presume that range to be a fair sentence for a particular defendant. The opinion states: "The guidelines are not only not mandatory on sentencing courts, they are also not presumed reasonable". This opens the door for sentencing courts to more easily apply a sentence outside of the Guidelines range and requires them to individually consider the facts of each case. Hopefully, this opinion will encourage an end to one-size-fits-all sentencing.

This means that federal trial courts should not robotically apply the Guideline ranges. They must consider the facts of each individual's case and any mitigating factors that might make the Guidelines range too harsh. Courts following this case will first complete the guidelines calculations, then make a determination if the suggested range of months is an appropriate sentence for each individual defendant. Of course this may leave an opportunity for a sentencing court to consider going above the guideline range too.

The short, four page case, is Lawrence W. Nelson AKA "Zikee" v. U.S., 599 U.S. ______ (2009). The previous citation is linked to a copy of the opinion. If you have any questions about your federal sentence, please do not hesitate to call the Klotz Law Firm.

Click here to view the published opinion.