The US Sentencing Commission speaks (sort of)!

I was just forwarded an article to appear in the Chicago Daily Law Bulletin which sets forth some viewpoints of US Sentencing Commissioners on Blakely. Based on what I have heard from folks dealing with Blakely “in the trenches,” there are aspects of the article that are absolutely astounding. Apparently in an interview US District Judge Ruben Castillo asserted:

that only about a fifth of the sentences in federal court involve upward departures made on the basis of factual determinations made by the sentencing judge. ”Eighty percent of the cases in the whole country are unaffected,” Castillo said…. [And] ”All indications are there’s going to be zero retroactive application of Blakely,” Castillo said…. ”I think at the end of the day, we’re going to be left with a very discrete number of cases that are going to be affected by Blakely,” Castillo said.

Though the retroactivity point is complicated and contestable (some thoughts here), the claim that 80% of federal cases are “unaffected” almost took my breath away. I hope readers who might have view on this important point will use the comments to explain whether I should resist suggesting that USSC rhymes with ostrich.