Sentencing — illegal reentry — fast-track

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing — illegal reentry — fast-track

A district court must address a fast-track disparity argument explicitly only when the defendant has made a sufficient evidentiary showing that he would be eligible for fast-track treatment in a district with such a program.

“This holding was not revolutionary but common-sense: ‘This requirement of a foundation for a claim of fast-track disparity simply recognizes that every defendant who asserts that his or her personal circumstances warrant leniency is compelled to supply a factual predicate for the contention.’ 675 F.3d at 641. To establish that factual predicate such that the sentencing court must take the time to comment on the argument, the defendant must show that he acted exactly like the defendant in a fast-track district. Ramirez instructed sentencing courts that, absent this evidentiary showing of the defendant’s actions, the court would not err by concluding that a fast-track argument is ‘illusory’ and therefore ‘may be passed over in silence.’ Id. at 636.”

Affirmed.

11-3675 U.S. v. Anaya-Aguirre

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Zagel, J., Hamilton, J.