Sentencing — Fair Sentencing Act

Listen to this article

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit

Criminal

Sentencing — Fair Sentencing Act

Where the district court did not know the correct mandatory minimum sentence, a limited remand is appropriate.

“The district judge’s remarks at sentencing give us no indication that she ever considered the possibility that a lower statutory minimum might apply to Currie (recall that Currie did not challenge the applicability of the ten-year minimum term below), nor do they include an unambiguous statement to the effect that the judge would have considered the 121- month sentence it imposed reasonable even if the five-year minimum specified by the Fair Sentencing Act applied, as we now know (in hindsight) that it does.”

“We therefore order a limited remand so that the district judge may consider, and state on the record, whether she would have imposed the same sentence on Currie knowing that he was subject to a five-year rather than a ten-year statutory minimum term of imprisonment. We shall retain jurisdiction over this appeal pending the district court’s answer to our inquiry.”

Affirmed and Remanded.

12-1666 U.S. v. Currie

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Barker, J., Rovner, J.