Court Opinion

ID: 9479974
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 07:34:12.934034+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:47:24.158933
License: Public Domain

REINHARDT, Circuit Judge,
concurring specially:
I concur in the result. I do not agree that the Guidelines “potentially pose fewer due process concerns than the pre-Guide-lines sentencing practice.” Nor do I agree that the risk of deprivation of a defendant’s liberty interest is arguably less under the Guidelines than under traditional sentencing procedures. In fact, I see little to commend the Guidelines in any respect. The strict limitations they impose on the traditional sentencing discretion of district judges run contrary to the basic principle which should govern modern sentencing— individualized consideration of the offender, the crime, and all of the relevant facts and circumstances relating to both. United States v. Barker, 771 F.2d 1362, 1365 (9th Cir.1985). Nevertheless, under our Constitution, it is Congress which has the authority to determine fundamental sentencing policy. When in doing so it acts within the limitations imposed by that document, we are required to uphold its action. Here, I agree with the majority that the Guidelines do not offend the due process clause on its face or as applied. Accordingly, I concur that we must affirm the district court.