JUSTICE DEPARTMENT SEEKS COURT RULING TO RESTORE SENTENCING

WASHINGTON -- The Justice Department Solicitor General's Office is expected
to ask the Supreme Court as early as today to rule on two cases it hopes
will restore the status quo to a federal sentencing system that has been in
chaos since a June high-court ruling.

Several circuit courts have ruled the federal sentencing guidelines are
unconstitutional since the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against state
guidelines in the Blakely v. Washington case. In that 5-4 decision, the
court said that any factor increasing a criminal sentence must be admitted
by the defendant in a plea deal or proved to a jury, effectively barring a
judge from using information in increasing a defendant's sentence that
wasn't heard or decided by the jury. The ruling was related to guidelines
used in Washington state, but the ramifications of the ruling have been
most acutely felt in the federal system.

The Justice Department had sought cases it could push to the Supreme Court
to support the department's belief that the guidelines are constitutional.

The two cases are prosecutions of Ducan Fanfan of Massachusetts, and
Freddie J. Booker of Wisconsin. The cases, previously identified in the New
York Times, both include drug convictions where federal judges ruled that
the Blakely decision limited the information judges could use to impose
harsher sentences on the men.

Mr. Booker's attorney, T. Christopher Kelly, of Madison Wis., said the
department has indicated the decision would be this week and that he would
have seven days to respond.

Mr. Fanfan's attorney, Rosemary Curran Scapicchio, said the court could
likely decide whether to hear the Justice Department's appeal by Aug. 2.
Both attorneys have said they haven't decided whether to oppose the Justice
Department's move.

The Supreme Court has on certain occasions taken cases on an expedited
basis. Last year, the court heard arguments on campaign finance in
September, although its session didn't begin until October.