Is Twenty-Two Years Enough for the “Millennium Bomber”?: The Threat of Terrorism to Appellate Review of Sentences

03 Sep 2013 11:38pm Robin Kuntz 

Robin Kuntz, a current CLR member, analyzes the implications of the Ninth Circuit's decision in United States v. Ressam, the first case in the jurisdiction involving the criminal sentencing of a terrorist under the advisory Sentencing Guidelines. Kuntz concludes that although the Guidelines do not offer a clear standard by which a court must set a criminal defendant's punishment, this is advantageous, particularly in cases involving terrorists like the "Millennium Bomber," the defendant at the heart of Ressam.

This case note is one of seven written by California Law Review members for Circuit's first case note program. 

  |   VIEW PDF

META


The California Law Review is the preeminent legal publication at the UC Berkeley School of Law.
Founded in 1912, CLR publishes six times per year on a variety of engaging topics in legal scholarship.
The law review is edited and published entirely by students at Berkeley Law.