From our private database of 26,900+ case briefs...
Mistretta v. United States
United States Supreme Court
488 U.S. 361, 109 S.Ct. 647, 102 L.Ed.2d 714 (1989)
Congress enacted the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 (the Act) to combat serious disparities in sentencing for criminal punishment. The Act: (1) rejects rehabilitation and declares that punishment should be “retributive, educational, deterrent, and incapacitative”; (2) creates the United States Sentencing Commission (Commission), which sets sentencing guidelines (Guidelines); (3) makes sentences essentially final; (4) imposes the Guidelines on federal courts; and (5) authorizes limited appellate review of sentences. The Commission is an independent body in the judicial branch comprised of members appointed by the president. At least three members must be judges. The Commission must set, review, and revise the Guidelines, report to Congress, set policies, and monitor and train judicial actors. Here, John Mistretta (defendant) was indicted in federal court on drug charges. Mistretta moved for a declaration that the Guidelines were unconstitutional on the grounds that the Act violated the separation of powers and nondelegation doctrines. The district court concluded that the Commission should be treated as an executive branch entity and the Guidelines as agency rules. Though the court expressed reservations about the Act, it rejected Mistretta’s argument. Mistretta pled guilty and was sentenced to prison, pursuant to the Guidelines. Mistretta filed notice of appeal. Before the Eighth Circuit ruled, Mistretta and the government petitioned the United States Supreme Court for certiorari, which was granted on the basis of “imperative public importance.”
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Blackmun, J.)
Dissent (Scalia, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 541,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 541,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 26,900 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.