Tuesday, June 28, 2005

Where Government Filed § 3553(e) / § 5K1.1 Motion at Sentencing, Crosby Remand Required even though Defendant Was Sentenced to the Statutory Minimum

United States v. Tesoriero, Docket No. 04-2017 (2d Cir. June 28, 2005): The Government is apparently still quite sore about Crosby (and likely even more so about Fagans) and its holding that all plain-error cases pending on direct review must be remanded to the district court for a determination of whether the defendant's "substantial rights" (in plain error parlance) were affected by the Booker error (i.e., the use of mandatory Guidelines). In this case, the defendant was sentenced to the 10-year statutory minimum for a § 841(b)(1)(A) offense at the pre-Blakely sentencing, despite the fact that he cooperated with the Government and earned a § 3553(e) / 5K1.1 motion as a result. Defendant sought a Crosby remand on appeal and the Government opposed, citing United States v. Sharpley, 399 F.3d 123 (2d Cir. 2005), and arguing that because the defendant received the statutory minimum sentence, any Booker error in treating the Guidelines as binding was harmless. The Circuit disagreed and ordered a Crosby remand, distinguishing Sharpley on the ground that the Government filed a § 3553(e) motion on Tesoriero's behalf and thus that the sentencing judge was no longer bound by the 10-year minimum.

This case serves as an excellent rebuttal to the Government's claim that a Crosby or Fagans remand is unnecessary in a particular case because the Booker error was harmless. (One would have thought that such arguments were foreclosed by Crosby and especially Fagans, which explicitly did not undertake a harmless error analysis but simply remanded for resentencing). This is so because the sentencing judge here, in light of the substantial assistance motion filed by the Government, was not bound by either the statutory minimum or the Guidelines when s/he nonetheless imposed the 10-year sentence. Thus, if the Booker error is not harmless even in this context, it is hard to imagine a situation (outside of the one presented in Sharpley) in which the Court would find a Booker error harmless.

5 Comments:

Blogger The Answer Man said...

Find Out What The Real Estate Investment "GURUS" Either Don't Know Or Aren't Telling You

Click Here For More
Information



creative real estate

October 12, 2005 at 8:02 PM  
Blogger The Real Estate Answer Man said...

Real Estate investors........ Are You Sick Of The "UGLY HOUSE", "Fix And Flip" Or Rental Property Game And All Of The Headaches That Come With It?

Click Here For More
Information


davedeldotto

October 13, 2005 at 7:17 PM  
Blogger The Real Estate Answer Man said...

Find Out What The Real Estate Investment "GURUS" Either Don't Know Or Aren't Telling You

Click Here For More
Information



tom vu

October 14, 2005 at 5:15 AM  
Blogger The Answer Man said...

This Is The Way SMART Real Estate Investors Make Their Money..... And It's NOT With "UGLY HOUSE" Rhabs Or Foreclosues And Short Sales

Click Here For More
Information


dave del dotto

October 15, 2005 at 2:03 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Great Book .. Live Your Life With A Little Daily Motivation.. Do we seek self empowerment Daily,weekly or yearly. I have been interested in working and self empowerment for years now. I am driven to success by the master teachers from the past. I really enjoy people like Wayne Dyer, Greg Vanden Berge and Tony Robbins. Im writing to this blog for selfish reasons, I want to see everyone live the life of their dreams. I am Living my life to the fullest and it is due to a book writen by Greg Vanden Berge . Master Goal Achiever and Author of Start Living Your Dreams Today.. A Great Book from the masters.. I hope you enjoy the book as much as I did..

February 13, 2006 at 10:10 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home