Character, choice, and "aberrant behavior": aligning criminal sentencing with concepts of moral blame
Article Abstract:
Courts should utilize their discretion under federal criminal sentencing guidelines to assess offenders' character in formulating sentences for aberrant behavior, meeting the legal and moral blame of the acts. A character theory supplementing the guidelines is the best method in calculating the effect of spontaneous emotions and motivations of criminal acts. Courts adopting the character theory, however, must focus on the circumstances surrounding conduct and not consider past actions or alternative choices available to offenders at the time of the acts.
Publication Name: University of Chicago Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0041-9494
Year: 1998
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Why time limits on the ratification of constitutional amendments violate Article V
Article Abstract:
The Supreme Court's ruling in 1921 that there is no constitutional prohibition on time limits for the ratification of amendments to the Constitution was wrongly decided. The ratification process established under Article 5 of the Constitution would not be allowed by the Supreme Court today, in light of its statements on the need for strict maintenance of congressional power structures. Time limits make it easier for Congress to pass an amendment, while making ratification more difficult, and limit the states' participation in the ratification process.
Publication Name: University of Chicago Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0041-9494
Year: 1999
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
"Imposing" a sentence under Rule 35(c)
Article Abstract:
Rule 35(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure should be interpreted to mean that a sentence is imposed when the judgment is entered into the record and not when orally pronounced. Because rule 35(c) only permits judges to correct errors and not make discretionary changes, the additional time between oral pronouncement and recording of the judgment allows for the correction of errors which would be costly to amend on appeal. This best fits the purpose of the rule.
Publication Name: University of Chicago Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0041-9494
Year: 1998
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Ethics, taxes, contracts and ethical dilemmas. Reducing the tax burden of transfers to charities. Choices and consequences
- Abstracts: The bureaucratic heavy hand in China: legal means for foreign investors to challenge agency action. Speak now: the accused student's right to remain silent in public university disciplinary proceedings
- Abstracts: Gang busters; prosecutors are turning to powerful federal statutes and some handy local ordinances to stop criminal gangs in their tracks. part 2
- Abstracts: When outsiders fill in; work arrangements with nonfirm lawyers can increase liability risks. Joke's on us - but shouldn't be
- Abstracts: Love's labor laws: novel ways to deal with office romances after the thrill is gone