Environmental Criminal Prosecution: Essential Tool Or Government Overreaching?: Bark and Bite: The Environmental Sentencing Guidelines After Booker
In: Utah Law Review, Jg. 2009 (2009), S. 1151
academicJournal
Zugriff:
I. Introduction The federal sentencing guidelines for environmental crimes bark loudly, calling for sentences of imprisonment for all but the most trivial of environmental offenses. 1 Although the terms of imprisonment are not long, the prospect of even a short period of incarceration is doubtlessly capable of getting the attention of the white-collar professionals who commit environmental offenses. 2 Research I conducted in 2004, however, indicated that the bark of the environmental guidelines was considerably worse than their bite. 3 Judges "departed" below the applicable guidelines range in an unusually high percentage of environmental cases; 4 barely one-third of convicted environmental defendants received prison sentences, 5 and only about 40 percent of prison sentences exceeded one year in length. 6 Although the data contained in my 2004 study were striking at the time, ensuing developments might appropriately raise questions as to their reliability today. Most notably, the Supreme Court fundamentally restructured federal sentencing law through its 2005 decision in United States v. Booker, which changed the status of the federal sentencing guidelines from mandatory to advisory. 7 Additionally, whereas the earlier study was largely based on data from the Clinton era, 8 the Bush administration substantially modified federal charging and plea-bargaining policies, particularly with an eye toward reducing sentencing departure rates. 9 Congress also has pressed this policy goal. 10 Finally, eight years of Republican control of the White House undoubtedly resulted in significant changes in the ideological balance of the federal judiciary. With such developments in mind, the ...
Titel: |
Environmental Criminal Prosecution: Essential Tool Or Government Overreaching?: Bark and Bite: The Environmental Sentencing Guidelines After Booker
|
---|---|
Autor/in / Beteiligte Person: | O'Hear, Michael M. |
Zeitschrift: | Utah Law Review, Jg. 2009 (2009), S. 1151 |
Veröffentlichung: | 2009 |
Medientyp: | academicJournal |
Schlagwort: |
|
Sonstiges: |
|