Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

08-4015 U.S. v. Glosser

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 29, 2010//

08-4015 U.S. v. Glosser

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//September 29, 2010//

Listen to this article

Sentencing
Procedural errors

Where the district court announced that it would impose the mandatory minimum sentence during the change of plea hearing, before it knew the advisory guidelines range or had heard either party’s argument regarding the sentence, the sentence must be vacated.

“The district court’s references to a ten-year mandatory minimum sentence during the change of plea hearing were undoubtedly motivated in large part by a desire to ensure that Glosser understood he was facing more than the five- to forty-year sentence he initially thought he faced. It was no doubt frustrating to have a defendant repeatedly raise the incorrect statutory range, even after it had been clarified numerous times, and the district court’s desire and efforts to ensure that Glosser clearly understood the applicable statutory minimum sentence are commendable. And we commend the court on the very thorough discussion it had with Glosser to ensure that he understood the ramifications of a guilty plea before he entered it. Nonetheless, we agree with the government that a procedural error took place here. Cf. United States v. Vrdolyak, 593 F.3d 676, 683-84 (7th Cir. 2010) (remanding for resentencing where circumstances suggested that district court had committed to a noncustodial sentence for the defendant).

When the district court made its repeated assurances at the change of plea hearing that it would impose a ten-year sentence, it did so without knowing the advisory guidelines range, as evidenced by its explicit statement during the hearing that it did not know the range. The court also had not yet heard the parties’ positions on sentencing. Nor had it received the probation office’s PSR. And it is clear that the court went beyond simply explaining the consequences of a guilty plea, as it repeatedly ‘promised’ Glosser a sentence of ten years.”

Vacated and Remanded.

08-4015 U.S. v. Glosser

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, McCuskey, J., Williams, J.

Full Text

Polls

What kind of stories do you want to read more of?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests