United States v. Gardner

Seventh Circuit

United States v. Gardner

142 F. App'x 926

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

DecidedAugust 30, 2005

DocketNo. 04-1826

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 142 F. App'x 926 (United States v. Gardner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

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

Pincite

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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 F. App'x 926, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-gardner-ca7-2005.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack