skip navigation
search

KIMBROUGH v. UNITED STATES (No. 06-6330)
174 Fed. Appx. 798, reversed and remanded.
Syllabus

Opinion
[Ginsburg]
Concurrence
[Scalia]
Dissent
[Thomas]
Dissent
[Alito]
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version
HTML version
PDF version

552 U. S. ____ (2007)

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

DERRICK KIMBROUGH, PETITIONER v.UNITED STATES

on writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the fourth circuit


[December 10, 2007]

    Justice Alito, dissenting.

    For the reasons explained in my dissent in Gall v. United States, ante, p. ___, I would hold that, under the remedial decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U. S. 220, 258–265 (2005) , a district judge is still required to give significant weight to the policy decisions embodied in the Guidelines. The Booker remedial decision, however, does not permit a court of appeals to treat the Guidelines’ policy decisions as binding. I would not draw a distinction between the Guideline at issue here and other Guidelines. Accordingly, I would vacate the decision of the Court of Appeals and remand for reconsideration.