United States v. Dawson, Pierre

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Per Curiam

United States v. Dawson, Pierre

Opinion

UNPUBLISHED ORDER Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53

United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604

March 17, 2006

Before

Hon. RICHARD D. CUDAHY, Circuit Judge

Hon. RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge

Hon. ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judge

Nos. 04-2557 and 04-2592

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appeals from the United States Plaintiff-Appellee, District Court for the Northern District of v. Illinois, Eastern Division.

PIERRE DAWSON and ALFONZO No. 02 CR 688 INGRAM, Defendants-Appellants. Elaine E. Bucklo, Judge.

ORDER

On Paladino remand, the judge stated simply: β€œThe issue before me is whether I would have imposed the same sentences on these defendants if I had known the Sentencing Guidelines were advisory. In this case I would have imposed the same sentences.” The sentences were guideline sentences and such sentences are, as we held in United States v. Mykytiuk, 415 F.3d 606,608 (7th Cir. 2005), presumptively reasonable under the new regime of the Booker case. The defendants in the present case do not contend that the judge refused to consider or address any arguments they may have made for why the guidelines sentences imposed on them were unreasonable. Their only contention is that Mykytiuk is inconsistent with Booker and should be overruled. It is not inconsistent, and we shall not overrule it. The judgment is AFFIRMED.

Reference

Status
Unpublished