« More additions for the (endless) sentencing reading list | Main | Academic input on a not-so-academic Booker fix proposal »

April 17, 2005

More interesting district court Booker action

After a few weeks of more Booker circuit action than I can handle (evidenced here), I am pleased to see that the district courts are again contributing some interesting opinions in the post-Booker world.  As detailed here, Judge Gertner at the end of last week expounded on acquitted conduct post-Booker with a potent decision in US v. Pimental, No. 99-10310-NG (D. Mass. Apr. 15, 2005).  And now I see on-line a number of other interesting district court opinions from last week:

  • In US v. Turner, NO. 3:03-CR-22(02), 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6368 (N.D. Ind. Apr. 13, 2005), the district court, addressing a Paladino remand from the Seventh Circuit, sets out in rigorous and methodical form how the factors in 3553(a) inform the court's view of the defendant's sentence.  The court concludes that, "if required to resentence Mr. Turner in light of United States v. Booker, 125 S. Ct. 738 (2005), the court would reimpose the original sentence."

  • In US v. Agostini, No. S17 00 Cr. 237, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6377 (S.D.N.Y. Apr. 13, 2005), the district court considers a broad range of post-Booker sentencing issues in a lengthy and interesting sentencing memorandum which explains the court's conclusion that "a sentence higher than that yielded by the Guidelines range would be warranted in this case to adequately meet the sentencing goals of punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation appropriate to this defendant and the extreme gravity of the crimes of which he was convicted."

  • In US v. Carmona-Rodriguez, No. 04 Cr. 667, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6254 (S.D.N.Y Apr. 11, 2005), the district court carefully reviews the Booker sentencing factors on the way to concluding that, because of "(1) the low probability that Carmona-Rodriguez will recidivate and (2) her need for ongoing medical monitoring and treatment, ... a non-Guidelines term of incarceration is warranted." In this ruling, the district court spotlighted recent district court decisions in Nellum (discussed here) and Simon (discussed here) which stressed that older offenders are less likely to recidivate, and the court asserted that the imposed "non-Guidelines sentence is proportional to those imposed by the Nellum and Simon courts."

April 17, 2005 at 02:40 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference More interesting district court Booker action:


Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB