 |
|
Limiting the Use of Acquitted and Uncharged Conduct at Sentencing: Apprendi v. New Jersey and Its Effect on the Relevant Conduct Provision of the United States Sentencing Guidelines |
|
Freya Russell |
|
| Since the adoption of the United States Sentencing Guidelines, sentencing courts have been permitted to consider all “relevant conduct” (including acquitted and uncharged conduct) when determining the guidelines range for an offense, provided the underlying facts were proven to the judge by a preponderance of the evidence. However, in June 2000, the Supreme Court held in Apprendi v. New Jersey that facts which support an increase in the maximum sentence for an offense must be charged in an indictment and proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The Court did not specifically address the ruling’s effect on the United States Sentencing Guidelines. This Casenote argues that after Apprendi, sentencing courts may no longer use the Relevant Conduct Provision of the federal sentencing guidelines to increase the guidelines range for an offense based on acquitted or uncharged conduct. | |
|
|
|
Copyright
© 1997 by California Law Review, Inc. |
|