Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

09-3932, 10-2190 & 10-2689 U.S. v. Ramirez

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 20, 2011//

09-3932, 10-2190 & 10-2689 U.S. v. Ramirez

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//July 20, 2011//

Listen to this article

Illegal reentry
Sentencing; fast track departure

A district court need not address a fast-track argument unless the defendant has shown that he is similarly situated to persons who actually would receive a benefit in a fast-track district.

“That means that the defendant must promptly plead guilty, agree to the factual basis proffered by the government, and execute an enforceable waiver of specific rights before or during the plea colloquy. It also means that the defendant must establish that he would receive a fast-track sentence in at least one district offering the program and submit a thorough account of the likely imprisonment range in the districts where he is eligible, as well a candid assessment of the number of programs for which he would not qualify. Until the defendant meets these preconditions, his “disparity” argument is illusory and may be passed over in silence.”

Affirmed.

09-3932, 10-2190 & 10-2689 U.S. v. Ramirez

Evans, J.

Full Text

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests