United States v. Rodriguez

178 F. App'x 572
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Rodriguez. Read the opinion of the Court — 302 F. App'x 468
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit·Decided April 27, 2006·No. No. 03-2523·Published

Opinion

ORDER

After we ordered a limited remand, see United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220(205), 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621; United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471, 484 (7th Cir.2005), the district judge informed us that he would have imposed the same sentence on Daniel Rodriguez had he known the sentencing guidelines were advisory. Because that sentence was within the properly calculated guidelines range, it was presumptively reasonable. United States v. Mykytiuk, 415 F.3d 606, 608 (7th Cir.2005). Rodriguez filed no response to rebut that presumption and our independent review uncovers nothing to suggest unreasonableness, therefore the judgment is AFFIRMED.

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

United States v. Rodriguez, 178 F. App'x 572 (7th Cir. 2006).

178 F. App'x 572 (United States v. Rodriguez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

United States v. Booker
543 U.S. 220 (Supreme Court, 2004)
United States v. Robert Mykytiuk
415 F.3d 606 (Seventh Circuit, 2005)