Abstract
In 2000, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Apprendi v. New Jersey, and in 2004, Blakely v. Washington, both of which concerned state court sentencing procedures. However, the Court did not make clear whether or not these precedents extended to federal court sentencing. The Seventh Circuit, in U.S. v. Booker (2004), reasoned that these decisions must hold also for federal sentencing, hence reversing the elevated sentence imposed by the judge under the preponderance of evidence standard, and remanding it to the Wisconsin district court for resentencing. The Supreme Court granted cert to U.S. v. Booker (along with a First Circuit case, U.S. v. Fanfan) to resolve the question, siding with the Seventh Circuit. It then proceeded, in record numbers, to issue Grant, Vacate and Remand dispositions of sentences across the country. The question in this article is, was the High Court effective in changing sentencing law across the country?
Recommended Citation
Sara C. Benesh,
GVRs and Their Aftermath in the Seventh Circuit and Beyond,
32
S. Ill. U. L.J.
659
(2008).
Available at:
https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siulj/vol32/iss3/12