Case ID: f-appx_140/html/0620-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Angel LECHUGA-PONCE, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 04-2986.
    United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
    Argued Jan. 19, 2005.
    Decided July 27, 2005.
    Michelle L. Jacobs, Office of the United States Attorney, Milwaukee, WI, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Kirk B. Obear, Elkhart, WI, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before CUDAHY, MANION, and EVANS, Circuit Judges.
   ORDER

In an opinion and order dated May 17, 2005, this court directed a limited remand to the District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin in the above-captioned case. United States v. Lechuga-Ponce, 407 F.3d 895 (7th Cir.2005). We did so pursuant to this court’s decision in United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471 (7th Cir. 2005). In that case this court held that in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), a criminal defendant sentenced pursuant to the sentencing guidelines was entitled to a remand “where this court cannot be assured that the district court would have arrived at the same sentence if it had treated the guidelines as advisory.” Lechuga-Ponce, 407 F.3d at 897.

On remand, the district court determined that “I may have sentenced the defendant differently had I known that the United States Sentencing Guidelines were advisory.” In light of the conclusion, and consistent with this court’s decision in Paladino, we order that Lechuga-Ponce’s sentence is vacated and this case is remanded to the district court for resentencing.