Judge Goodwin speaks on Booker!

Providing another must-read for Booker fans on a Friday morning (along with Judge Sifton's work in Simon discussed here), SDWV District Judge Joseph Goodwin gives us his take on the post-Booker world with US v. Gray, No. 3:03-00182 (SD W Va Mar. 17, 2005) (available here).   Judge Goodwin did some terrific work post-Blakely (see here and here), and his post-Booker work in Gray does not disappoint.  Here is the opinion's introduction:

First, I calculated the applicable Guideline range for each defendant by making appropriate findings of fact and resolving objections to the presentence report.  Following this determination, I examined and applied the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).  I then considered what the Guideline advice would have been if calculated using only the evidence proven beyond a reasonable doubt.  Once I had investigated each applicable factor, I considered these factors, along with the Guideline range, as separate pieces of advice that together informed the exercise of my discretion as I determined an appropriate sentence for the defendants, Terrence Askew and Joshua Gray.

Below is a discussion of the factual findings determined at the sentencing hearing, a discussion of the applicable § 3553(a) factors, and a calculation of the defendants’ advisory Guideline range.  In addition to factual objections to the presentence report, each defendant, by counsel, filed numerous legal arguments with the court in the form of sentencing memoranda.  Specifically, the defendants raised important reasonable doubt, ex post facto, and Crawford v. Washington concerns both in their memoranda to the court and at the hearing in this matter.  I deal with each of these concerns at length below.