About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

1997 U. Ill. L. Rev. 583 (1997)
The Standard of Proof at Sentencing Hearings under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Why the Preponderance of the Evidence Standard Is Constitutionally Inadequate

handle is hein.journals/unilllr1997 and id is 595 raw text is: THE STANDARD OF PROOF AT SENTENCING HEARINGS UNDER THE FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES: WHY THE PREPONDERANCE OF THE EVIDENCE STANDARD IS CONSTITUTIONALLY INADEQUATE STEPHANIE C. SLATKIN In 1984 Congress, responding to public dissatisfaction with the perceived arbitrariness of existing sentencing schemes, vested in the US. Sentencing Commission the authority to devise stringent fed- eral sentencing guidelines. As part of the effort to divest federal judges of discretion in sentencing, the Sentencing Guidelines cre- ated a bifurcated system of fact-finding that allows a prosecutor to allege and the judge to find certain facts at the sentencing phase of a criminal prosecution. If these facts constitute relevant conduct or aggravating circumstances as defined by the Sentencing Guidelines, the presiding judge may depart upwards from the sen- tencing range prescribed by the guidelines. Perhaps more impor- tantly, proof of these collateral facts by a mere preponderance of the evidence is sufficient to warrant departure. In this note, the author challenges the constitutionality of ap- plying the preponderance standard to the sentencing phase of a criminal proceeding. Arguing that the Sentencing Guidelines im- permissibly evade due process requirements by reclassifying ele- ments of charged offenses as sentencing factors, the author recommends a return to the beyond a reasonable doubt standard for proof of sentencing factors that are, in actuality, uncharged of- fenses or elements of the underlying offense. Additionally, for traditional sentencing factors that are in fact collateral, the author advocates use of the clear and convincing evidentiary standard. I. INTRODUCTION On June 15, 1995, the eighteen-year mystery surrounding the dis- appearance and presumed murder of candy heiress Helen Vorhees Brach was finally resolved when a federal district judge sentenced Richard Bailey to thirty years in prison.' Bailey had pleaded guilty to racketeering charges for fleecing a series of rich women in worthless horse deals, but he denied defrauding Brach or participating in her 1. See Matt O'Connor, Bailey Gets 30 Years, But in Effect, It's Life, Cn. TRm., June 16, 1995, § 2, at 1.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most