Legal Opinion
United States v. Detwiler
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided October 5, 2004No. CR 03-372-PAPublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION AND ORDER
PANNER, District Judge.
Pending before the court is Defendant’s motion to declare the Feeney Amendment unconstitutional and to impose sentence under the pre-Feeney version of the federal Sentencing Guidelines. That motion is granted in part. I hold that:
1. The federal Sentencing Guidelines system, in its present form, is unconstitutional because it violates the separation of powers doctrine.
2. The defects are not severable.
3. The federal Sentencing Guidelines will be treated as true guidelines, and not mandates, when imposing sentence in this and all future cases, pending…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Lewis v. CaseySupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Carey v. PiphusSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Koon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Mistretta v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. SchorSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- United States v. Evgueni Pojilenko A/K/A Eugene, A/K/A Zheka Evgueni PojilenkoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2005
- United States v. Edward Coleman A/K/A John Long, Edward ColemanCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2006
- United States v. GroberDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 2008
- United States v. ShipleyDistrict Court, S.D. Iowa · 2008
- United States v. JohnsonDistrict Court, S.D. Iowa · 2008
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.