scholarly journals Witte v. United States: Double Jeopardy and the United States Sentencing Guidelines

1996 ◽  
Vol 86 (4) ◽  
pp. 1539
Author(s):  
Elizabeth J. Wiet
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
Double Jeopardy

scholarly journals Double Jeopardy and Dual Sovereignty Doctrine: Gamble v. United States

2019 ◽  
pp. 225-242
Author(s):  
Javier Escobar
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Supreme Court ◽  
United States Supreme Court ◽  
The United States ◽  
United States Supreme ◽  
Double Jeopardy ◽  
The Supreme Court

Abstract: In Gamble v. United States, the defendant questioned the constitutionality of the dual sovereignty doctrine under the double jeopardy clause. In its judgment, delivered on 17 June, 2019, the United States Supreme Court upheld the application of the dual sovereignty doctrine, according to which different sovereigns may prosecute an individual without violating the double jeopardy clause if the individual's act infringed the laws of each sovereignty. This comment aims to address the reasoning of the Supreme Court and the rationale of the dual sovereignty doctrine, suggesting the convenience and necessity of a further study on its limits and the possible safeguards against potential abuses. 

Probability and Punishment

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 214-272
Author(s):  
Jacob Schuman
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Decision Making ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Threshold Level ◽  
The United States ◽  
Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
District Courts ◽  
Case Based ◽  
Drug Sentencing

The United States Sentencing Guidelines place little emphasis on probability. Instead, the Guidelines recommend a sentence in each case based only on whether certain facts about the offender’s crime exceed a “threshold” level of likelihood. Guidelines sentences therefore fail to reflect the precise odds of each defendant’s wrongdoing, which makes them both inefficient and unfair. This model of decision making is particularly problematic in drug sentencing, where judges often impose lengthy sentences based on drug quantity calculations that carry a high risk of error. To address these problems, district courts should exercise their discretion, and policymakers should implement reforms that incorporate probability into punishment.

scholarly journals Codifying Cultural Heritage: Why United States Criminal Law Suddenly Treats Our Rare Materials with Respect

2008 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 205-212
Author(s):  
Travis McDade
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Cultural Heritage ◽  
Criminal Law ◽  
The United States ◽  
American People ◽  
Cultural Resources ◽  
Sentencing Guidelines ◽  
Term Benefit

“The Cultural Heritage Guideline will, in my opinion, prove to be one of the most important of all the sentencing guidelines for the long-term benefit of our nation,” said United States Attorney (now federal magistrate judge) Paul Warner. He was testifying before the United States Sentencing Commission, which was about to get serious with cultural crimes. He was also echoing what he had written in a letter to the Commission a mere three months earlier. In that letter, which fully addressed the harm caused to the American people by crimes against cultural resources, he explained that “[f]ew undertakings by the . . .

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document