United States v. Carty

Amicus curiae brief of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

Brief filed: 09/25/2006


United States v. Carty

9th Circuit Court of Appeals; Case No. 05-10200


Under the current federal sentencing guidelines scheme, as reformed by United States v. Booker, the “presumption of reasonableness” on review, adopted by some other circuits and advocated by the government, has no basis in the statutory language and is contrary to the constitutional principle that underlies Booker. Adoption of a judge-made presumption that a correctly-calculated sentence imposed within the guidelines range would resurrect pre-Booker guideline sentencing and would be contrary to the plain language of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

Featured Products


Karen Landau, Oakland, CA, and Peter Goldberger, Ardmore, PA.