A Booker week in review and preview

I predicted here that last week would be dramatic in the sentencing world, and I was not disappointed.  Judge Adelman’s notable decision in Ranum (basics here, commentary here and here) probably was the week’s highlight, but also noteworthy was the start of Booker circuit action (details here and here), and the prospect of more soon.  (Collected commentary on all the exciting Booker action of the last two weeks can be found here and here and  here and here.)

I suspect this coming week should be exciting as other branches start jumping into the post-Booker act.  With the inauguration in the books, the inside-the-Beltway folks are likely to get to work on the federal sentencing system.  Especially since I surmise most federal judges are pleased with the outcome in Booker, I will be particularly interested in whether, as I queried here two months ago, federal judges will engage in the coming policy debate over the future of federal sentencing.

As suggested before here, the Justice Department’s views concerning the post-Booker shape of federal sentencing will be most critical in the coming policy debate.  In this regard, it bears remembering that making the guidelines advisory was the remedy strenuously advocated by DOJ if Blakely was to be applied to the federal system (though I wondered at length here a few months ago whether DOJ would really like an advisory guidelines world). 

Finally, speaking of DOJ, I have now heard from various sources that Main Justice has issued official guidance about Booker to prosecutors in the field.  I have not yet seen any official DOJ post-Booker guidance (though letter briefs posted here and here reveal the basic contours of its litigation strategy).  I am hopeful that, in the interests of justice and to serve the goals of honesty, consistency and transparency in sentencing, the Justice Department will make public ASAP its policies and practices in the wake of Booker.

UPDATE: And I forgot to mention that, according to the SCOTUS Blog here, the Supreme Court will “issue an order list and one or more opinions on Monday.”  Would it be too much to ask for a decision in Shepard to clear up the critical, and still confusing, “prior conviction” exception?