United States v. Gardner

Seventh Circuit

United States v. Gardner

142 F. App'x 926

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·Decided August 30, 2005·No. No. 04-1826·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

ORDER

On limited remand under United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471 (7th Cir.2005), the district court concluded that “it would have imposed a different sentence had it known the guidelines were merely advisory.” The parties filed memoranda in response to our written invitation and agree that Gardner’s sentence should be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing. Accordingly, we VACATE Gardner’s sentence and REMAND for resentencing in light of United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).

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

ORDER

On limited remand under United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471 (7th Cir.2005), the district court concluded that “it would have imposed a different sentence had it known the guidelines were merely advisory.” The parties filed memoranda in response to our written invitation and agree that Gardner’s sentence should be vacated and the case remanded for resentencing. Accordingly, we VACATE Gardner’s sentence and REMAND for resentencing in light of United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005).

United States v. Gardner, 142 F. App'x 926 (7th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

142 F. App'x 926 (United States v. Gardner) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related