Sentencing — sentencing guidelines

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing — sentencing guidelines

Where the sentencing judge rejected a defendant’s request for a modest below-guidelines sentence simply because it was modest and below the guidelines, the sentence is vacated.

“Perhaps the judge intended only to paraphrase the familiar principle that the guidelines are ‘the initial benchmark’ for an appropriate sentence. See Gall, 552 U.S. at 49. But where a ‘judge’s remarks are subject to a variety of interpretations,’ we are left ‘to wonder whether he treated [the guidelines] as presumptively reasonable.’ United States v. Panice, 598 F.3d 426, 441-42 (7th Cir. 2010). The surrounding discussion adds to the ambiguity. After finding essentially no difference between a 64-month and a 68-month sentence, the only reason the judge gave for choosing the latter was his statement about the guidelines. The quick imposition of sentence without any further explanation suggests that the judge may have impermissibly placed a ‘thumb on the scale favoring a guideline sentence.’ United States v. Sachsenmaier, 491 F.3d 680, 685 (7th Cir. 2007). In similar circumstances we have remanded for resentencing. See, e.g., Johnson, 635 F.3d at 989-90; Panice, 598 3 F.3d at 441-42.”

Vacated and Remanded.

11-1257 U.S. v. Pennington

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, Mills, J., Sykes, J.