Posted On: October 16, 2007
NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS REJECTS SUGGESTED REQUIREMENT THAT SENTENCING JUDGES RECONCILE DISPUTES IN SENTENCING MEMOS
The Ninth Circuit has an intriguing little sentencing ruling today in US V Saeteurn, No. 06-10401 (9th Cir. Oct. 15, 2007). Here is how it starts:
This case deals with sentencing practice. Specifically, is the sentencing judge required to resolve disputes regarding facts recited in the Presentence Investigation Report (“PSR”), when those facts do not affect the term of imprisonment imposed, but may affect how the sentence is served, including a possible early release from prison? We hold that there is no such requirement upon the sentencing judge. We also consider whether the sentencing judge imposed a reasonable sentence in this case. We conclude that he did.
