United States v. Mitrione

Seventh Circuit

United States v. Mitrione

142 F. App'x 925

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit

DecidedAugust 26, 2005

DocketNos. 02-4222, 02-4224

StatusPublished

This text of 142 F. App'x 925 (United States v. Mitrione) 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. Mitrione, 142 F. App'x 925 (7th Cir. 2005).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

After our limited remand under United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471, 483-84 (7th Cir.2005), the district judge concluded, unequivocally, that knowledge about the advisory status of the sentencing guidelines would not have affected her decision. She would have imposed the same sentence as originally imposed on both Robert Mitrione and Marla DeVore. Those sentences, we conclude, could not be viewed as unreasonable. Accordingly, the defendants’ objections to their sentences are rejected, and the judgments under appeal are AFFIRMED.

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

ORDER

After our limited remand under United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471, 483-84 (7th Cir.2005), the district judge concluded, unequivocally, that knowledge about the advisory status of the sentencing guidelines would not have affected her decision. She would have imposed the same sentence as originally imposed on both Robert Mitrione and Marla DeVore. Those sentences, we conclude, could not be viewed as unreasonable. Accordingly, the defendants’ objections to their sentences are rejected, and the judgments under appeal are AFFIRMED.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

142 F. App'x 925, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-mitrione-ca7-2005.