ADVERTISEMENTS

United States v. Peebles, No. 09--1986 (6th Cir. Nov. 4, 2010) (published) (panel of Judges Martin, McKeague, Ludington [of E.D. Mich.]).

As condition of supervised release, defendant was not allowed to have contact with other felons. Had romantic relationship with another felon. Defendant falsely stated she had not had contact with other felons. Finally admitted the contact.

Defendant told to submit a report explaining the rationale behind the prohibition on contact with other felons. She failed to complete the report. Ultimately charged with ten violations of supervised release. Defendant pleaded guilty.

District court did not calculate the sentencing guidelines. It was unclear what the advisory range was. Probation report listed range of 3 to 9 months. Several revisions of these calculations later, however, showed the range to be 8 to 14 months. Court imposed sentence of 10 months.

* District court did not address guideline range at all.

* Range was not discussed by either attorney or by the judge.

* Impossible to determine range court relied on or whether the court meant to impose a sentence within the range or above it.

* Sentence procedurally unreasonable.

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