Case ID: f-appx_162/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. Adriese THOMAS, Defendant-Appellant.
    No. 04-2553.
    United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
    Jan. 10, 2006.
    Rehearing Denied April 11, 2006.
    Manish Shah, Office of the United States Attorney, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
    Richard H. Parsons, Jonathan E. Hawley, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Peoria, IL, Retha Stotts, Office of the Federal Public Defender, Urbana, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.
    Before Hon. RICHARD A. POSNER, Hon. JOHN L. COFFEY, and Hon. ANN CLAIRE WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
   ORDER

On limited remand pursuant to United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471 (7th Cir. 2005), the district court responded that it would have imposed the same sentence had it known the guidelines were not mandatory. Thomas’s 24-month sentence is in the middle of a properly calculated guideline range and is therefore presumptively reasonable. See United States. v. Mykytiuk, 415 F.3d 606, 608 (7th Cir.2005). And because Thomas declined our invitation to file memoranda concerning the district court’s response, she failed to rebut this presumption. Nothing in the record suggests this sentence is unreasonable, thus, we AFFIRM the judgment.