On January 12, 2005, the US Supreme Court handed down a pair of landmark decisions that could fundamentally shift the balance of power for corporations facing criminal antitrust investigations from the Department of Justice (“DOJ”). In United States v. Booker and United States v. Fanfan, the Supreme Court, reversing more than 20 years of federal sentencing practices, held that the US Sentencing Guidelines (“USSG”) may no longer mandate judges to enhance sentences beyond the statutory maximum unless the predicate facts supporting such enhancements are fi rst proved by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, or admitted by defendant. For many years, the USSG has served as the bedrock of virtually all criminal antitrust sentences for the DOJ. However, Booker and Fanfan now require the DOJ to
Share on
|
|
The US Supreme Court holds that the sentencing guidelines may no longer mandate judges to enhance sentences beyond the statutory maximum unless the predicate facts supporting such enhancements are first proved by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, or admitted by defendant (Booker)
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers
Already Subscribed? Sign-in
Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.
Read one article for free
Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.
