October Term 2007 · Docket 06-7517
Must judges explain new sentencing reasons before the verdict?
The dispute centers on whether a judge must announce new sentencing reasons before the final sentence.
Verified source milestones
- — An official oral-argument transcript was verified.
The arguments, in order
This case may have been argued more than once. Each entry below uses that session's official transcript. Later arguments do not erase earlier ones.
Argument 1 ·
What happened at the argument
Mr. Madden argued that the sentencing process failed due to lack of notice.
Mr. Rutledge argued for two alternative grounds to support the lower court.
Mr. Roberts argued that Rule 32 requires notice for new grounds.
Read the official transcript for this argument · Official argument details
Sources used for this argument breakdown
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 3-21 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 3-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 37-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-41 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-29 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-33 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 47-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 47-21
A citizen's guide to the whole case
What this case is about
This case tests the timing of judicial explanations during sentencing.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 3-21 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 3-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 37-9
How the case got here
The Supreme Court heard oral argument in this case on April 15, 2008.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
What each side wants
the side that brought the case seeks a rule requiring advance notice of new sentencing reasons.
The government seeks to allow judges to state new reasons at the final hearing.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 3-21 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 3-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 37-9
What each side says
the side that brought the case argues that surprise sentencing reasons violate fair process.
The government argues that judges need flexibility to explain sentences fully.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 3-21 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 3-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 37-9
What the justices asked
Justice Scalia asked if the notice rule fits advisory guidelines.
Justice Ginsburg asked what the judge intended with the evidence.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-41 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-29 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-33 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 47-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 47-21
Why it matters
This issue defines how clearly judges must explain their sentencing choices.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 3-21 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 3-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 37-9
What happens next
This article currently covers the argument record. Use the official docket link for later case activity.
Official sources for this section
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 7-15 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 7-15
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 11-23 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 11-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 4, lines 39-3 — Transcript, file page 4, lines 39-3
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 5, lines 19-11 — Transcript, file page 5, lines 19-11
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 6, lines 23-31 — Transcript, file page 6, lines 23-31
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 7, lines 19-41 — Transcript, file page 7, lines 19-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 13-23 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 13-23
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 29-29 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 29-29
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 8, lines 33-41 — Transcript, file page 8, lines 33-41
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 19-27 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 19-27
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 33-33 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 33-33
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 45-45 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 45-45
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 9, lines 47-21 — Transcript, file page 9, lines 47-21
Official Court provenance
Official docket and case history · Official Supreme Court oral-argument detail page
Title and summary sources
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 3-21 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 3-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 37-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 18, lines 3-21 — Transcript, file page 18, lines 3-21
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 3, lines 17-9 — Transcript, file page 3, lines 17-9
- Official Supreme Court Transcript — file page 37, lines 37-9 — Transcript, file page 37, lines 37-9
Revision history
- Revision 1 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Rewritten to the concise citizen-facing editorial standard.
- Revision 2 · Official Transcript ·
Correction: Migrated to the dated official Court activity contract without model use.