Notable pipeline cases from the 7th Circuit

The Seventh Circuit today has issued two interesting opinions which affirm sentences imposed by district courts in the interregnum between Blakely and Booker.  See US v. Paulus, No. 04-3092 (7th Cir. Aug 22, 2005) (accessible here); Bryant v. US, No. 04-2850 (7th Cir. Aug 22, 2005) (accessible here).  Both rulings cover a lot of interesting ground, and both reflect the Seventh Circuit's obvious interest in maintaining a post-Booker federal sentencing world that looks a lot like the pre-Booker federal sentencing world (as was made so clear in the court's Mykytiuk and Dean rulings last month). 

In Bryant, for example, the court gives the back of its hand to the argument that, after Blakely and Booker, factual determinations in sentencing may now need to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt: "We reiterate, however, that these cases do not foreclose judicial factfinding in the sentencing context, nor do they dictate that judges must find those facts beyond a reasonable doubt."  And, in both cases, the Seventh Circuit concludes its reasonableness review by restating its position, first expressed in Mykytiuk, "that sentences properly calculated under the guidelines ... are entitled to a rebuttable presumption of reasonableness."