ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Federal Judiciary Blogs -> Second Circuit Sentencing Blog

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Federal Judiciary

: Second Circuit Sentencing Blog

Second Circuit: Still No Problem With Acquitted Conduct Sentencing

ADVERTISEMENTS

United States v. Robles, et al., Nos. 07-1013-cr (L), 07-1027-cr (con), 07-1221-cr (con) (2d Cir. April 9, 2009) (found here)

There has been much criticism of acquitted conduct sentencing.  I've written on it here.  And Doug Berman of Sentencing Law & Policy has strong views on it as well, including here.  And in Robles, the Second Circuit once again affirms a sentence based on it without even batting an eye:

This Court has ruled that a district court may take into account even acquitted conduct when sentencing a defendant. United States v. Juwa, 508 F.3d 694, 700 (2d Cir. 2007) (?A sentencing court is not limited to considering only evidence of the convicted offense; it may take into account other relevant conduct, and even acquitted conduct . . ..?) (citations omitted);United States v. Vaughn, 430 F.3d 518, 526 (2d Cir. 2005). In Vaughn, we stated that



district courts may find facts relevant to sentencing by a preponderance of the evidence, even where the jury acquitted the defendant of that conduct, as long as the judge does not impose (1) a sentence in the belief that the Guidelines are mandatory, (2) a sentence that exceeds the statutory mandatory maximum authorized by the jury verdict, or (3) a mandatory minimum sentence under [21 U.S.C.] § 841(b) not authorized by the verdict.



430 F.3d at 527 (citing United States v. Gonzalez, 420 F.3d 111, 129 (2d Cir. 2005)) (emphasis added). None of the three Vaughn factors present an issue here. Appellants have not alleged that the district court believed the Guidelines to be mandatory, and the third factor is not relevant in this case. Appellants? sentences were below the maximum sentence of 20 years? imprisonment for their convictions under the Hobbs Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1951. We find no constitutional violation.

Full post as published by Second Circuit Sentencing Blog on April 11, 2009 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Law Articles

Lawsuits and Settlements

Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0022 secs (from cache 10/31/26 17:54:27)