United States v. Estrada
District Court, D. Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION
HEANEY, Circuit Judge, Sitting by Designation.
Jesus Estrada moves this Court for an order precluding application of the recently promulgated Federal Sentencing Guidelines and Policy Statements (hereinafter guidelines) to his case on the ground that they are unconstitutional.
This Court finds the guidelines to be in violation of the separation of powers, both because they impermissibly grant substantial legislative power to the judicial branch of government and because they require federal judges to perform duties which would substantially impair the ability of the judiciary…
2Cases cited40 opinions
- Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
- Buckley v. ValeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Aetna Life Insurance v. HaworthSupreme Court of the United States · 1937
- Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Rummel v. EstelleSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- United States v. Ortega LopezDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1988
- United States v. Tyrone SturgisCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1989
- United States v. BrittmanDistrict Court, E.D. Arkansas · 1988
- United States v. TolbertDistrict Court, D. Kansas · 1988
- United States v. BogleDistrict Court, S.D. Florida · 1988
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.