There are no comments up to now.
Blog Federal Courts weigh in on Rita v. United States | Federal Courts weigh in on Rita v. United States |
|
|
|
| Written by James Ostgard | |
|
There is already a district court opinion interpreting Rita v. United States from the Eastern District of Wisconsin in United States v. Santoya, No. 06-CR-82 (ED Wis. June 25, 2007). Judge Lynn Adelman has written a number of influential, or at least attention-getting, post-Booker opinions which are referenced in a post at the "Sentencing Law and Policy" website. You can find Judge Adelman's opinion and commentary on Rita here . James Ostgard 2007-06-25
Update 2007-06-27 The Eighth Circuit mentions Rita in United States v. Booth, No. 06-3131 (filed 6/27/07) but only for the base proposition that a sentence within the Guidelines will be presumed reasonable. There is no analysis. The case is tragic: for reasons which are not clear at all, defense counsel did not pursue a challenge to the loss calculation for guidelines purposes and actually declared at sentencing that it was "undisputed that we've got a million-one intended loss." The appellate panel, in a footnote, questioned whether stolen airplane parts which were obsolete and intended for disposal should have been valued at the price originally paid by the company/victim of the fraud, and observed that it "seemed doubtful" there was any equality between the original purchase price and the current value. Citing the defense lawyer's concessions and the failure to raise the issue on appeal, the Court leaves the Guidelines calculation, and the hapless defendant's Guidelines sentence, intact. As our friend Virginia Villa would say, "Yikes!"
Update 2007-06-30 The Seventh Circuit seems to have distilled Rita down pretty clearly and simply in United States v. Sachsenmaier, No. 05-3505 (Filed 6/28/07), and you can find commentary and a copy of the opinion here .
» No Comments
There are no comments up to now.
» Post Comment
Only registered users can write a comment.
Please login or register. |