미국 연방양형기준 수정과정 고찰 : Fair Sentencing Act의 제정과 연방양형위원회의 역할을 중심으로 = A Study on the development of the United States Sentencing Guidelines: focusing on Introducing Fair Sentencing Act and Related Amendments to Sentencing Guidelines.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The United States federal sentencing guidelines(hereinafter `the guidelines`) have been revised steadily to seek proportionate sentencing since its first promulgation of 1987 under the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. In 2010, the Fair Sentencing Act was enacted, which reduces the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine punishments. This article illuminates the United States Sentencing Commission`s(hereinafter `the Commission`) roles to revise the federal sentencing guidelines. To find out the Commission`s roles, the article reviews the processes of the revisions to reduce the sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine punishments. Under the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse Act, the guidelines had to reflect 100-to-1 drug quantity ratio of crack to powder cocaine penalties and also set the sentencing ranges just above the minimum statutory penalties. These disparities were reduced to 18-to 1 ratio by introducing FSA in 2010. Since the enforcement of the guidelines, the Commission submitted four reports to the Congress that the disparity between crack and powder cocaine penalties be removed for proportionate sentencing consistency. And also the Supreme Court`s decision in the United States v. Booker in 2005 contributed to change the guidelines binding force as mandatory into advisory. The Commission`s recommendation in the reports and the Supreme Court`s related decisions after Booker made a constructive ground which finally led to the introduction of the FSA and related guidelines amendments. As a result, the Commission was able to change the `drug quantity table` pursuant to the FSA and to reduce the base offense levels of crack cocaine offenses by two levels in §2D.1.1, Guidelines Manual. Though the amendments to the Guidelines is not complete from the view of proportionate sentencing consistency, they are directing towards more proportionate consistency. Thus, the Commission is contributing to positive roles in the `development` of the federal sentencing guidelines.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 양형위원회, "양형기준안에 관한 제4차 공청회 결과 보고Ⅰ" 2011

2 최석윤, "마약범죄 양형기준안 지정토론문, 양형기준수정안 지정토론문, 양형기준안에 관한 제4차 공청회 결과보고" 양형위원회 73-78, 2011

3 최승재, "마약범죄 양형기준안 지정토론문, 『양형기준수정안 지정토론문』, 양형기준안에 관한 제4차 공청회 결과보고" 양형위원회 81-86, 2011

4 Ruback, R. B, "The Federal Sentencing Guidelines: Psychological and Policy Reasons for Simplification" 7 (7): 739-775, 2001

5 Bowman, Ⅲ, Frank O., "The Failure of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines: A Structural Analysis" 105 : 2005

6 USSC, "Special Report to Congress: Cocaine and Sentencing Policy" 1995

7 USSC, "Report to the Congress: Impact of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010" 2015

8 USSC, "Report to the Congress: Impact of the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010" 2015

9 USSC, "Report to the Congress: Cocaine and Federal Sentencing Policy" USSC 2007

10 USSC, "Report on the Continuing Impact of United States v. Booker on Federal Sentencing, Part A" 2012

11 Honold, Dan, "Quantity, Role, and Culpability in the Federal Sentencing Guidelines" 389 (389): 389-413, 2014

12 Krasnostein, Sarah, "Pursuing Consistency in an Individualistic Sentencing Framework: If You Know Where You're Going, How Do You Know When You've Got There?" 76 (76): 265-288, 2013

13 USSC, "Policy Profile: Sensible Sentencing Reform: The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010"

14 USSC, "Policy Profile, Sensible Sentencing Reform: The Fair Sentencing Act of 2010"

15 Bonneau, Alexandra B., "Offensive Drug Offenses: applying Procedural Justice Thoery to Drug Sentencing in the United States and United Kingdom" 93 : 1485-1521, 2013

16 USSC, "Memorandum, Analysis of the Impact of the 2014 Dug Guidelines Amendment if Made Retroactive"

17 U.S. Department of Justice, "Memorandum for all Federal Prosecutors"

18 Steiker, Carol, "Lessons From Two Failures: Sentencing For Cocaine and Child Pornography under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines in the United States" 76 (76): 27-52, 2013

19 USSC, "Guidelines Maunual: Supplement to Appendix C"

20 USSC, "Guidelines Manual 2015, Appendix C"

21 USSC, "Guidelines Manual"

22 Salaut, C., "Federal Mandatory Minimum Sentencing" Nova Publishers 2013

23 Department of Justice, "Fact Sheet: The Impact of United States V. Booker on Federal Sentencing"

24 Sentencing Council, "Dug Offences Definitive Guideline"

25 Sentencing Council, "Drug Offences; Response to Consultation"

26 Baron-Evans, Amy, "Booker Rules" 160 : 1631-1681, 2012

27 USSC, "Analysis of the Impact of the Crack Cocaine Amendment If Made Retroactive" 2007

28 USSC, "Amendment 788, USSG, 2015, Supplement to Appendix C"

29 FAMM, "A Brief History of Crack Cocaine Sentencing Laws"

30 양형위원회, "2014 연간보고서" 양형위원회 2015