Kimbrough v. United States

E649387

Kimbrough v. United States is a 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision holding that federal judges may deviate from the Sentencing Guidelines, particularly the crack–powder cocaine disparity, based on policy disagreements with those guidelines.

Try in SPARQL Jump to: Statements Referenced by

Statements (48)

Predicate Object
instanceOf United States Supreme Court case
criminal sentencing case
appliesTo United States Sentencing Guidelines NERFINISHED
areaOfLaw federal criminal law
sentencing law
arguedDate October 2, 2007
category 2007 in United States case law
United States Supreme Court cases of the Roberts Court NERFINISHED
United States Supreme Court cases on sentencing
citation 552 U.S. 85
clarified extent of district court discretion under advisory Sentencing Guidelines
concurrenceBy Antonin Scalia NERFINISHED
Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED
country United States of America
surface form: United States
court Supreme Court of the United States
decidedDate December 10, 2007
decisionDate 2007
dissentBy Anthony M. Kennedy NERFINISHED
Antonin Scalia NERFINISHED
Clarence Thomas NERFINISHED
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. NERFINISHED
docketNumber 06-6330
effect increased judicial discretion to vary from crack cocaine guideline ranges
recognized that the Sentencing Commission’s crack–powder ratio was not based on empirical data in the same way as other Guidelines
fullCaseName Derrick Kimbrough v. United States NERFINISHED
holding A sentencing judge may impose a sentence outside the Guidelines range because the judge disagrees with the crack–powder cocaine sentencing disparity embodied in the Guidelines.
Federal district courts may deviate from the United States Sentencing Guidelines based on policy disagreements with the Guidelines.
The crack–powder cocaine ratio in the Sentencing Guidelines is advisory, not mandatory.
influenced later reforms to federal crack cocaine sentencing policy
joinedByInMajority Anthony M. Kennedy NERFINISHED
Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr. NERFINISHED
David H. Souter NERFINISHED
John Paul Stevens NERFINISHED
Samuel A. Alito, Jr. NERFINISHED
Stephen G. Breyer NERFINISHED
jurisdiction United States federal courts NERFINISHED
legalIssue crack–powder cocaine sentencing disparity
federal sentencing discretion
interpretation of advisory Sentencing Guidelines after United States v. Booker
majorityOpinionBy Ruth Bader Ginsburg NERFINISHED
priorHistory United States v. Kimbrough, 174 F. App’x 798 (4th Cir. 2006) NERFINISHED
recognized district courts may consider the disparity between the Guidelines’ treatment of crack and powder cocaine offenses when imposing sentence
relatedCase Gall v. United States NERFINISHED
United States v. Booker NERFINISHED
standardOfReview reasonableness review for sentences outside the Guidelines range
subsequentCitationBy federal appellate courts reviewing crack cocaine sentences
topic crack cocaine sentencing
policy-based variances from Guidelines

Referenced by (1)

Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.

United States v. Booker subsequentInterpretationBy Kimbrough v. United States