Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherBrowse by ChannelAbout the NetworkJoin the NetworkProductsSub-MenuProducts OverviewBlog ProBlog PlusBlog PremierMicrositeSyndication PortalsAbout UsContactSubscribeSupport
Book a Demo
Search
Close

“Not Guilty Means Not Guilty”: U.S. Sentencing Commission Unanimously Votes to Prohibit the Consideration of Acquitted Conduct in Sentencing Determinations

By Gregory G. Marshall on April 29, 2024
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
“Not Guilty Means Not Guilty”: U.S. Sentencing Commission Unanimously Votes to Prohibit the Consideration of Acquitted Conduct in Sentencing Determinations

On April 17, 2024, the seven-member panel of the U.S. Sentencing Commission voted to adopt an amendment prohibiting judges from using acquitted conduct in applying the federal sentencing guidelines. Previously, and consistent with the decision in United States. v. Watts, 519 U.S. 148, 157 (1997) (per curiam) (holding that “a jury’s verdict of acquittal does not prevent the sentencing court from considering conduct underlying the acquitted charge, so long as that conduct has been proved by a preponderance of evidence”), federal judges were permitted to consider acquitted conduct under the guidelines, and typically did so through application of U.S.S.G. § 1B1.3 (Relevant Conduct (Factors that Determine the Guideline Range)), § 1B1.4 (Information to be Used in Imposing Sentence), and § 6A1.3 (Resolution of Disputed Factors (Policy Statement)).

The U.S. Supreme Court put the Sentencing Commission on notice last year when it relisted several petitions for certiorari that asserted challenges to the constitutionality of considering acquitted conduct in sentencing calculations. However, the Court ultimately declined to grant certiorari and hear those cases. Several justices indicated that it was appropriate for the Court to wait on considering such challenges until the Sentencing Commission addressed the issue. See, e.g., McClinton v. United States, 143 S. Ct. 2400, 2400-03 (2023) (Sotomayor, J., statement) and id. at 2403 (Kavanaugh, J., statement, joined by Gorsuch, J., and Barrett, J.). The vote by the Sentencing Commission was part of several amendments passed on April 17 for the purpose of, according to Commission Chair Judge Carlton W. Reeves, “creating a more effective and just sentencing system.” Regarding the change pertaining to acquitted conduct, Chair Reeves stated: “Not guilty means not guilty. By enshrining this basic fact within the federal sentencing guidelines, the Commission is taking an important step to protect the credibility of our courts and criminal justice system.”

Despite the Sentencing Commission’s unanimous decision on the acquitted conduct reform, questions remain as to the scope and status of the proposed amendment, including whether the amendment will apply retroactively and whether it will face congressional opposition. Unless Congress legislates to the contrary, the amendment is scheduled to take effect on November 1, 2024.

Photo of Gregory G. Marshall Gregory G. Marshall

A former federal prosecutor with extensive trial and appellate experience, Greg Marshall represents companies and individuals defending government enforcement, white-collar criminal, and civil litigation matters. Greg also conducts internal investigations and advises clients on compliance issues. He has assisted clients in the financial…

A former federal prosecutor with extensive trial and appellate experience, Greg Marshall represents companies and individuals defending government enforcement, white-collar criminal, and civil litigation matters. Greg also conducts internal investigations and advises clients on compliance issues. He has assisted clients in the financial services, healthcare, government contracting, technology, export, and education sectors.

Greg has defended investigations and cases involving the False Claims Act, the Sherman Act, the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, the export control laws, and allegations of healthcare, corporate, securities, and tax fraud. He regularly handles matters involving the U.S. Department of Justice, federal agency Inspectors General, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, state Attorneys General, and other federal and state enforcement agencies.

Read more about Gregory G. MarshallEmailGregory's Linkedin Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Government
  • Blog:
    Eye on Enforcement
  • Organization:
    Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

LexBlog, Inc. logo
Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
Real Lawyers
99 Park Row
  • About LexBlog
  • Careers
  • Press
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Privacy Policy
  • Editorial Policy
  • Disclaimer
  • Terms of Service
  • RSS Terms of Service
  • Products
  • Blog Pro
  • Blog Plus
  • Blog Premier
  • Microsite
  • Syndication Portals
  • LexBlog Community
  • Resource Center
  • 1-800-913-0988
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
  • Resource Center
  • Blogging 101

New to the Network

  • Beyond the First 100 Days
  • In the Legal Interest
  • Cooking with SALT
  • The Fiduciary Litigator
  • CCN Mexico Report™
Copyright © 2025, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo