Sentencing — reasonableness

Listen to this article

U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing — reasonableness

A sentencing judge’s comments that the defendant had previously received lenient sentences do not show that the sentence was unreasonable.

“Although perhaps ill-advised and certainly not necessary, the judge’s speculation falls short of providing a basis for believing that the guideline sentence he imposed was substantively unreasonable. Viewed in context, the comments were a response to defense counsel’s arguments that the judge should impose a sentence below the guideline range. The judge explained that Banks’s marijuana use and continued involvement with guns and drugs were part of a troubling pattern of poor choices in his life and peer group. The judge explicitly noted that he could not and was not imposing a sentence to make up for the light sentences Banks received in state court. But he believed Banks’s record did not fully reflect his past relevant conduct. That conclusion and the sentence based on it did not amount to an abuse of discretion.”

Affirmed.

13-3527 U.S. v. Banks

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, Randa, J., Hamilton, J.