NINTH CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS SAYS JUDGES NEED NOT SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFY THEIR REJECTION OF SEC. 3553 FACTORS
How far must the federal courts go to justify a sentence? Here, the sentencing court articulated reasons for a sentence within the guidelines. It did not explicitly discuss, or articulate the reasons, for not considering the 3553 factors to impose a lower sentence.
The Ninth Circuit holds that the sentencing court need only to state the reasons for a sentence so imposed, citing Rita v. U.S., 127 S.Ct 2456 (2007) and U.S. v. Plouffe, 445 F.3d 1126 (9th Cir. 2006). It need not, at least here, specifically discuss the rejection of the 3553 factors so long as it considered them.
The Ninth Circuit found that the district court "apparently" considered the mitigating reasons presented by defendant in its stating of the reasons for the guidelines sentence.
But how did they come to that coinclusion? A crystal ball perhaps? This is another example of a result-oriented opinion.
Note; Always try to get your District Court to annunciate specific rejections of valid sec. 3553 factors, and raise the spector that this rejection was unreasonable.
US v. Perez-Perez, No. 06-30341 (10-22-07).
