Statements (60)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instance_of |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
|
| gptkbp:case_analysis |
Examined in law school curricula
|
| gptkbp:case_number |
03-633
Appealed from the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit |
| gptkbp:case_outcome |
Influenced sentencing policy reforms
Impact on mandatory minimum sentences Influenced public perception of sentencing fairness Judges must consider guidelines but are not bound by them Impact on federal sentencing guidelines Impact on federal sentencing practices Increased appeals related to sentencing Increased focus on rehabilitation in sentencing Increased scrutiny of sentencing decisions Increased variability in sentencing Influenced plea bargaining practices Judicial accountability emphasized Judicial discretion in sentencing upheld Judicial discretion increased Judicial independence reinforced Judicial review of sentences increased Reduced uniformity in sentencing Sentencing disparities addressed Sentencing guidelines must be advisory Sentencing guidelines unconstitutional as applied Judicial review of sentencing guidelines established |
| gptkbp:case_significance |
Landmark case in sentencing law
|
| gptkbp:case_types |
Criminal law
|
| gptkbp:decided_by |
gptkb:Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States
January 12, 2005 |
| gptkbp:dissenting_opinion |
gptkb:Justice_Antonin_Scalia
|
| gptkbp:effect_on_sentencing |
Judges have discretion in sentencing
|
| gptkbp:election |
5-4
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
United States v. Booker
|
| gptkbp:impact |
gptkb:Sentencing_Reform_Act_of_1984
|
| gptkbp:involved_parties |
gptkb:United_States
gptkb:David_Booker |
| gptkbp:is_cited_in |
gptkb:543_U._S._220
|
| gptkbp:judicial_review |
Constitutionality of sentencing guidelines
|
| gptkbp:legal_context |
Federal sentencing law
|
| gptkbp:legal_framework |
Influenced state sentencing laws
|
| gptkbp:legal_issue |
Sentencing guidelines
Debate over judicial vs. legislative sentencing authority |
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
gptkb:Separation_of_powers
Judicial discretion |
| gptkbp:legislation |
gptkb:Justice_for_All_Act_of_2004
gptkb:Violent_Crime_Control_and_Law_Enforcement_Act gptkb:Sentencing_Reform_Act Criminal Justice Reform Act |
| gptkbp:outcome |
Mandatory sentencing guidelines deemed unconstitutional
|
| gptkbp:precedent |
gptkb:United_States_v._Fanfan
|
| gptkbp:public_perception |
gptkb:Justice_Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg
|
| gptkbp:public_reaction |
Controversial decision
|
| gptkbp:related_cases |
gptkb:Gall_v._United_States
gptkb:Blakely_v._Washington gptkb:Kimbrough_v._United_States |
| gptkbp:scholarly_analysis |
Extensively analyzed in legal literature
|
| gptkbp:significance |
Changed how federal sentencing guidelines are applied
|
| gptkbp:bfsParent |
gptkb:Hughes_v._United_States
gptkb:Blakely_v._Washington |
| gptkbp:bfsLayer |
5
|