June 9, 2006
Two more reasonableness wins for the government in the First Circuit
Capping off a busy Booker week in the circuits, the First Circuit on Friday rejected two defendants' arguments that their within-guideline sentences were unreasonable in US v. Navedo-Concepción, No. 05-2301 (1st Cir. June 9, 2006) (available here) and US v. Alvarez-Enciso, No. 05-1941 (1st Cir. June 9, 2006) (available here). Of the two opinions, Navedo-Concepción has the most extensive discussion of reasonableness review (and both make brief mention of the parsimony provision of 3553(a)).
Reduced to its essence, Navedo-Concepción provides an revised account of the First Circuit's approach to post-Booker sentencing as set forth in Jiménez-Beltre, 440 F.3d 514 (1st Cir. 2006). Among the interesting aspects of Navedo-Concepción is a dissent from Judge Torruella, which has this start: "I am concerned that we are, like a glacier in the ice age, inch by slow inch, regressing to the same sentencing posture we assumed before the Supreme Court decided Booker."
June 9, 2006 at 11:00 PM | Permalink
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Two more reasonableness wins for the government in the First Circuit: