A Booker pair from the Third Circuit

The Third Circuit today issued two notable opinions, both authored by Judge Ambro, about post-Booker sentencing and reasonableness review. Here are the basics from the decisions' initial paragraphs:

US v. Jackson, No. 05-4091 (3d Cir. Nov. 9, 2006) (available here): "We address in this case further aspects of the sentencing process for our Circuit in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005).  In so doing, we affirm the sentence imposed by the District Court."

US v. Charles, No. 05-5326 (3d Cir. Nov. 9, 2006) (available here): "Randolph Charles appeals his sentence from a conviction in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania for possession of a prohibited object by an inmate. At issue is whether his sentence—a prison term of 46 months, which is at the highest end of the Federal Sentencing Guidelines range for the underlying offense—is reasonable in light of United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005). We review the sentence for reasonableness and, for the reasons set forth below, affirm it."

Notably, in both cases, within-guideline sentences were imposed and affirmed over the defendants' objections.