Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

Sentencing-Procedural Challenge

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//April 29, 2024//

Sentencing-Procedural Challenge

By: WISCONSIN LAW JOURNAL STAFF//April 29, 2024//

Listen to this article

7th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. William Campbell

Case No.: 23-1564

Officials: Easterbrook, Scudder, and St. Eve, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Sentencing-Procedural Challenge

William Campbell with his cousin, allegedly committed burglary in an Indiana residence, stealing more than 25 firearms, subsequently sold to another individual. Although law enforcement managed to retrieve eight of the stolen firearms, the remainder remained unaccounted for. Campbell faced indictment for feloniously possessing the eight recovered firearms, a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He pleaded guilty and received a 96-month prison sentence from the district court. During sentencing, the court suggested that the missing firearms likely ended up in the possession of other felons, who commonly purchase stolen firearms.

The district court adopted the presentence investigation report, which determined an adjusted offense level of 29 and a criminal history category of III, yielding an advisory Guidelines range of 108 to 120 months’ imprisonment. Nevertheless, the court opted for a below-Guidelines sentence of 96 months’ imprisonment. In justifying this decision, the court referenced the factors outlined in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a), discussing both mitigating and aggravating circumstances relevant to Campbell’s case.

On appeal, Campbell contended that the district court’s assertion regarding the missing guns constituted impermissible speculation, necessitating the vacation of his sentence. However, the appellate court disagreed. It conducted a de novo review of the procedural challenge and concluded that the district court did not rely on speculative or inaccurate information when imposing the sentence. The court’s concern stemmed from the fact that the firearms were unaccounted for, potentially in the possession of individuals outside law enforcement’s reach. Consequently, the district court’s judgment was upheld.

Affirmed.

Decided 04/24/24

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