A Distance of Miles Can Make a Difference of Years: Ameliorating Comparatively Harsh Sentences for Illegal Reentry Immigration Defendants After United States v. Reyes-Hernandez, 624 F.3d 405 (7th Cir. 2010)

Authors

• Angela J. Rollins

Abstract

Several districts across the country have implemented fast-track programs whereby federal prosecutors offer illegal reentry defendants reduced sentences in exchange for a quick guilty plea and the waiver of certain procedural rights.  This practice results in drastically varied sentences for the same crime depending on the jurisdiction in which the defendant is charged.  At the same time, one of the main goals of the Sentencing Guidelines is to reduce unwarranted sentence disparities.  Circuits are split as to whether sentencing courts may take this disparity into consideration when sentencing illegal reentry defendants.  In United States v. Reyes-Hernandez, the Seventh Circuit overturned circuit precedent and concluded that sentencing courts may consider the disparity created by the absence of a fast-track program.  This Note argues that the Seventh Circuit was correct in allowing sentencing judges to consider fast-track sentencing disparities; however, the court’s suggestion that a variance may be unreasonable if it is solely based on the fast-track disparity is inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s recent sentencing opinions.

Recommended Citation

Angela J. Rollins, A Distance of Miles Can Make a Difference of Years: Ameliorating Comparatively Harsh Sentences for Illegal Reentry Immigration Defendants After United States v. Reyes-Hernandez, 624 F.3d 405 (7th Cir. 2010), 36 S. Ill. U. L.J. 613 (2012).
Available at: https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siulj/vol36/iss3/7