All Courts |
Federal Courts |
US Court of Appeals Cases |
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit |
2006-06 |
-
UNPUBLISHED ORDER Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 June 23, 2006 Before Hon. JOEL M. FLAUM, Chief Judge Hon. MICHAEL S. KANNE, Circuit Judge Hon. TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge Nos. 03-2299, 03-3167, 03-3765, & 04-1238 Appeals from the United UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, States District Court for the Plaintiff-Appellee, Southern District of Indiana, Evansville Division. v. No. 02 CR 02 DEON T. GANTT, CHAD M. CARRICO, WILFREDO BARRIOS, Richard L. Young, Judge. and JOSE R. VIGIL, Defendants-Appellants. ORDER We ordered a limited remand to ask whether the district judge, had he known the sentencing guidelines were advisory, would have imposed the same sentence on Deon Gantt, Chad Carrico, Wilfredo Barrios, and Jose Vigil. See United States v. Booker,
125 S. Ct. 738(2005); United States v. Paladino,
401 F.3d 471, 484 (7th Cir. 2005). He answered that he would. We invited the parties to respond, and the defendants did in a consolidated manner. The defendants summarily ask us to revisit all of the issues previously raised in their appeals, which we will not do. The defendants also claim–without elaboration Nos. 03-2299, 03-3167, 03-3765, & 04-1238 Page 2 or support–that “the district court abused its discretion in light of the factors set forth in
18 U.S.C. § 3553.” We will uphold sentences on Paladino remand if the district judge gave “meaningful consideration” to the statutory factors. United States v. Williams,
425 F.3d 478, 480 (7th Cir. 2005). Here, the court issued a separate order for each defendant, and in each instance the district court reaffirmed its sentencing rationale. Because each of the sentences were within properly calculated guidelines ranges, they are presumptively reasonable. United States v. Mytiuk,
415 F.3d 606, 608 (7th Cir. 2005). The defendants do not articulate a challenge to the reasonableness of their sentences, and we see no basis for error. The sentences are AFFIRMED.
Document Info
Docket Number: 03-2299, 03-3167, 03-3765, 04-1238
Citation Numbers: 186 F. App'x 676
Judges: Hon, Flaum, Kanne, Evans
Filed Date: 6/23/2006
Precedential Status: Non-Precedential
Modified Date: 11/5/2024