By: Derek Hawkins//June 13, 2016//
7th Circuit Court of Appeals
Case Name: United States of America v. Christopher Saunders and Rashid Bounds
Case No.: 13-3863, 13-3910
Officials: EASTERBROOK, MANION, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges
Focus: Court Error – Sentencing
Court failure to disclose basis of expert’s opinion was harmless error.
“While the defendants analogize this case to Claybrooks, where we reversed the district court’s drug quantity finding, Claybrooks is distinguishable. In Claybrooks, the district court rejected the methodology used in the Presentence Investigation Report to arrive at a drug finding, but did not indicate another basis for arriving at its number. Id. at 707. Here, while the court was initially skeptical about the government’s ratio, it was presented with additional argument as to why the ratio was accurate and ultimately accepted the ratio as reliable. The district court did not calculate 3.69 kilograms because it was “split[ting] the difference” between the government’s theory and the jury’s verdict, or selecting a number that was in the middle simply for the sake of compromise. Cf. Claybrooks, 729 F.3d at 707; United States v. Dean, 574 F.3d 836, 845 (7th Cir. 2009). Instead, it based its calculation on the proposed ratio and the actual number of recovered Dormin bottles. Its responses provide enough for us to discern the reliable evidence that it used to make its calculation and we will not reverse under these circumstances. ”
Affirmed