Benson to keep sentence guidelines for now

Utah's chief federal judge on Monday announced he would continue to follow federal sentencing guidelines until a higher court ruling requires him to do otherwise.

U.S. District Judge Dee Benson took the position that a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision did not render the guidelines unconstitutional, a position taken by many jurists since the high court's decision in Blakely v. Washington.

"Regardless of the 'sky-is-falling' warnings (or dire prognostications) of the dissenting judges in Blakely, it is undisputedly true that Blakely and its reasoning do not (yet) apply to the federal sentencing statutes," Benson wrote. "However unclear the majority opinion may be in other regards, it is clear in that respect. The federal sentencing guidelines still constitute valid, and therefore binding, law."

In Blakely, the high court held that judges cannot legally rely on facts not proven beyond a reasonable doubt to lengthen a defendant's prison term beyond that set out in sentencing guidelines. The ruling applied only to Washington state guidelines, but many noted the striking similarity between those and federal guidelines and begun applying the decision in cases outside Washington.

Benson said he will continue to impose sentences under the guidelines but will also announce an alternative sentence that is not bound by the guidelines but determined by minimum and maximum penalties laid out in federal statutes.

The chief judge's order is opposite from one reached late last month by another Utah federal judge — U.S. District Judge Paul Cassell.

Just days after the Blakely decision was released, Cassell announced that he found the guidelines to be unconstitutional in some cases and said he would no longer impose them in those cases with Blakely issues. Rather, he said, he would impose a sentence according to the statutory range and also offer an alternative sentence based on the guidelines.

Benson noted the quickness with which Cassell reached his decision, saying Cassell "demonstrat(ed) an impressive turn of speed." However, Benson said, he found at least two previous Supreme Court opinions that appear to be inconsistent with Blakely and a finding opposite those decisions would overturn binding precedent.

"Such overruling of binding United States Supreme Court precedent should come from the pen of the author of a majority opinion for the Supreme Court, not from a district court judge."

Aside from Cassell and Benson, only one other Utah federal judge has weighed in on the implications of Blakely. U.S. District Judge Ted Stewart on Monday declined to enhance a St. George man's sentence after finding the increase would violate the man's Sixth Amendment rights to a trial by jury.

---

E-mail: awelling@desnews.com