Hi Ken. I was convicted of a federal offense (what it was isn't relevant) based on alleged misconduct that occurred in 2007. Under the guidelines in effect at the time, I was looking at a sentence of 37 to 46 months. However, my lawyer tells me that under the new guidelines that came into effect in 2009, I'm now looking at a sentence of 67 to 88 months.
My question is, doesn't enhancing the sentence based on guidelines not in effect at the time of the alleged crime violate the Constitution's prohibition on Ex Post Facto punishment? If you could answer, I'd really appreciate it, as I'm out on bail but have a sentencing hearing coming up this Friday.
Yuri_Gagarins_Ghost9 karma
Hi Ken. I was convicted of a federal offense (what it was isn't relevant) based on alleged misconduct that occurred in 2007. Under the guidelines in effect at the time, I was looking at a sentence of 37 to 46 months. However, my lawyer tells me that under the new guidelines that came into effect in 2009, I'm now looking at a sentence of 67 to 88 months.
My question is, doesn't enhancing the sentence based on guidelines not in effect at the time of the alleged crime violate the Constitution's prohibition on Ex Post Facto punishment? If you could answer, I'd really appreciate it, as I'm out on bail but have a sentencing hearing coming up this Friday.
View HistoryShare Link