On January 12, 2005, the United States Supreme Court a landmark ruling in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), , fundamentally reshaping the federal sentencing framework.
In Booker, the Court declared that the mandatory federal Sentencing Guidelines violated the Sixth Amendment, rendering them unconstitutional. To address this violation, the Court ruled that federal judges must consider the guidelines but are not bound by them, making the guidelines advisory rather than mandatory.
This case is significant for at least two reasons: 1) it made the United States Sentencing Guidelines advisory instead of mandatory, and 2) it made the Sixth Amendment applicable to the federal Sentencing Guidelines.
By making the guidelines advisory, judges gained more flexibility in sentencing decisions based on the specific circumstances of the case.
In the wake of Booker, the Training Division has actively supported defense professionals nationwide in adapting to, and thriving in this new sentencing landscape. Through comprehensive in-person and virtual national and local training programs—such as the Andrea Taylor Sentencing Advocacy Workshop and the Non-Capital Sentencing Mitigation Skills Workshop—the Training Division has empowered attorneys with strategies for effective sentencing advocacy. Additionally, it has provided extensive resources that address federal sentencing law post-Booker and subsequent Supreme Court decisions in Rita, Gall, and Kimbrough. These resources also offer arguments to support non-guideline sentences, including alternatives to incarceration, further enhancing the flexibility afforded to judges and defense counsel under the Booker framework.
The Booker decision remains a cornerstone of federal sentencing law, emphasizing the importance of individualized sentencing and the constitutional safeguards of the Sixth Amendment.