Hessicks co-author article in 'Alabama Law Review'
<p>Professors <a href="http://www.law.asu.edu/Apps/Faculty/Faculty.aspx?individual_id=51242">C… Byrne Hessick</a> and <a href="http://www.law.asu.edu/Apps/Faculty/Faculty.aspx?individual_id=51228">A… Hessick</a>, of the Sandra Day O'Connor College of Law, have co-authored an article, "Appellate Review of Sentencing Decisions," in the <i>Alabama Law Review</i>.</p><separator></separator><p>The authors note that when the U.S. Supreme Court struck down mandatory use of the federal sentencing guidelines, it authorized appellate courts to conduct reasonableness reviews of sentencing decisions. </p><separator></separator><p>According to the authors, the two objectives of this scheme - giving district courts discretion but cabining that discretion through reasonableness review - are in tension with each other. Moreover, the authors argue that, in balancing these conflicting aims in subsequent cases, the Supreme Court has sacrificed the central functions of appellate review - error correction and law making - and simultaneously created confusion by not acknowledging the tension at the heart of the new sentencing doctrine.</p><separator></separator><p>Read the article <a href="http://www.law.ua.edu/lawreview/articles/Volume%2060/Issue%201/Hessick… lang="EN">Judy Nichols, <a href="mailto:Judith.Nichols@asu.edu">Judith.Nichols@asu.edu</a><br />(480) 727-7895<br />Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law</span></p>