By: Derek Hawkins//August 8, 2016//
7th Circuit court of Appeals
Case Name: United States of America v. Grover Coleman Ferguson
Case No.: 15-3753
Officials: WOOD, Chief Judge, and MANION and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges
Focus: Sentencing
Judge departs too far from advisory guidelines without substantial explanation.
“By statute a judge must impose “a sentence sufficient, but not greater than necessary,” to serve the purposes of sentencing. 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). Here, the court did not explain why 50 years was “sufficient, but not greater than necessary.” The government requested an above‐guideline sentence of 20 years. That recommendation did not bind the court, of course, but we are unable to tell from the district court’s stated reasoning why 20 or 30 or 40 years would have been insufficient to serve the purposes of sentencing mandated in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The district court’s explanation does not “allow for meaningful appellate review” of why the judge deemed 50 years appropriate, and not any shorter sentence. Gall, 552 U.S. at 50. We do not mean to overstate the district court’s duty of providing an explanation. Nor do we intend to imply that there is only one reasonable sentence in this or any other case, or that sentencing is an exact science. We have upheld other above‐guideline sentences that district courts did not justify in great detail, but those cases did not present circumstances as dramatic as this one.”
Vacated and Remanded