Sentencing

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Billy J. Robinson, Jr.

Case No.: 15-2019

Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and MANION and ROVNER, Circuit Judges

Focus: Sentencing

Court erred in its failure to adequately explain the sentence provided to appellants.

“While “sentencing is an individual, and at times idiosyncratic, process,” this “does not excuse the court from its duty to ensure a fair process.” Figueroa, 622 F.3d at 743–44. Because the district court did not “adequately explain its chosen sentence” with reference to the relevant criteria laid out in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), Robinson’s sentence does not “allow for meaningful appellate review [or] promote the perception of fair sentencing.” Gall, 552 U.S. at 50. The government argues that if we look at the sentence as a whole, and ignore the inappropriate comments, the district court provided enough of an explanation of its sentence for us to affirm. See Wilson, 383 F. App’x at 556–57 (finding no reversible error where district court made some inappropriate comments, but ultimately justified sentence based on Section 3553(a) factors). We cannot do so here. Because the district court’s improper extraneous comments were interwoven with its consideration of the Section 3553(a) factors, “[w]e have no way of knowing how, if at all, these extraneous considerations influenced [Robinson’s] sentence.” Figueroa, 622 F.3d at 74”

Vacated and Remanded

Full Text

Attorney Derek A. Hawkins is the managing partner at Hawkins Law Offices LLC, where he heads up the firm’s startup law practice. He specializes in business formation, corporate governance, intellectual property protection, private equity and venture capital funding and mergers & acquisitions. Check out the website at www.hawkins-lawoffices.com or contact them at 262-737-8825.