Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca7-08-03799/USCOURTS-ca7-08-03799-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
United States of America
Appellee
Marcus L. Welton
Appellant

Document Text:

United States Court of Appeals 

For the Seventh Circuit 

Chicago, Illinois 60604 

May 28, 2010 

Before

 FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Chief Judge

 WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge

 TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge 

No. 08-3799 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

 v.

MARCUS L. WELTON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

On Remand from the 

Supreme Court of the United 

States. 

Order 

 Our prior opinion, 583 F.3d 494 (7th Cir. 2009), affirmed Welton’s sentence after 

concluding that the principle of Kimbrough v. United States, 552 U.S. 85 (2007), does not 

apply to the career-offender Guideline, U.S.S.G. §4B1.1. While Welton’s petition for 

certiorari was pending, we overruled the panel’s opinion in this case. United States v. 

Corner, 598 F.3d 411 (7th Cir. 2010) (en banc). The Supreme Court then granted 

Welton’s petition and remanded with instructions to reconsider in light of Corner. 

No. 09-8367 (U.S. Mar. 20, 2010). 

 Welton contended in the district court that the principle of Kimbrough applies to 

§4B1.1, and Corner holds that this position is correct. The district court erred in thinking 

otherwise (though the district judge is not responsible for this error, which was based 

on earlier decisions that Corner overruled). In a post-remand filing under Circuit Rule 

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION 

To be cited only in accordance with 

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

Case: 08-3799 Document: 29 Filed: 05/28/2010 Pages: 2
No. 08-3799 Page 2 

54, the United States contends that the judge’s error was harmless. But the burden of 

demonstrating harmless error is on the prosecutor, and it is not evident to us that the 

district judge was determined to impose the same sentence without regard to the effect 

of Kimbrough on §4B1.1. 

 A remand for resentencing is the best way to find out. If, as the United States 

contends, Corner does not affect Welton’s sentence, the district judge has only to say so. 

But if it does affect the exercise of discretion in sentencing, Welton is entitled to the 

benefit. 

 Welton’s sentence is vacated, and the case is remanded for resentencing 

consistent with Kimbrough and Corner. 

Case: 08-3799 Document: 29 Filed: 05/28/2010 Pages: 2