United States v. Brown

175 F. App'x 71
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Brown. Read the opinion of the Court — 125 F. App'x 51
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·Decided April 5, 2006·No. No. 04-1534·Published

Opinion

ORDER

This court ordered a limited remand so the district court could state on the record whether the sentence remains appropriate now that United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), has limited the Sentencing Guidelines to advisory status. See United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471 (7th Cir.2005).

The district judge has now replied that she would have imposed a lower sentence rather than the 97-month sentence then mandated by the guidelines. The parties’ position statements in response to our invitation to comment on the district court’s Paladino response agree that resentencing is appropriate. Accordingly, pursuant to Paladino, we VACATE Brown’s sentence and REMAND to the district court for resentencing.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

United States v. Brown, 175 F. App'x 71 (7th Cir. 2006).

175 F. App'x 71 (United States v. Brown) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)