ago that it was my opinion that these guidelines were contrary to the United States Constitution. That issue has been laid to rest contrary to my view by the United States Supreme Court. So these guidelines, in spite of your view on the legality of them and my view on it, they are part of the law of the land that bind me and I must follow that.


11
When Tillitz asked Judge Bryan for the name of the case in which he had discussed the constitutionality of the Guidelines, Judge Bryan answered: "It's past history now and it's of no assistance to us."


12
Judge Bryan then sentenced Tillitz to a 360-month term of imprisonment, the low end of the applicable Guidelines range. Tillitz's conviction and sentence were upheld on directindividual cases." Id.


23
Here, there is an additional circumstance not present in Crawford that compels our attention—Judge Bryan's impassioned plea to this court.


24
In his November 3, 2005 order, Judge Bryan said:


25
A Sentencing Guidelines scheme was adopted by Congress and implemented by the United States Sentencing Commission on November 1, 1987. Many judges, including the undersigned, believed that the Sentencing Guidelines were contrary to the requirements of the U.S. Constitution. Nevertheless, the Supreme Court, in its wisdom, found that the guidelines passed constitutional muster.


26
Many defendants, including Mr. Tillitz and Mr. Carrington, were sentenced under the mandatory guidelines scheme, and many, including Mr. Tillitz and Mr. Carrington, are still incarcerated under mandatory guideline sentences. . . .


27
During the period of the guidelines' mandatory life — 1987 to 2005-judges, like the undersigned,