Source: https://casetext.com/case/united-states-v-booker-23
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 14:32:22+00:00

Document:
United States of America, Plaintiff, v. Rodney Lavell Booker, Defendant.
A sentence under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines constitutes a sentencing package which takes into account all counts upon which the defendant has been convicted.
When one of these counts is set aside or vacated, the district court is free to reconsider the sentencing package de novo unless the appellate court specifically limited the district court's discretion on remand.
Ward v. Williams, 240 F.3d 1238,1243 (10th Cir. 2001) (citation omitted).
The statute [28 U.S.C. § 2255] gives district courts broad and flexible remedial authority to resentence a defendant and correct the sentence as appropriate. A remedy that seems appropriate is to put § 2255 defendants in the same position as defendants on direct appeal by permitting resentencing . . .
The scope of a court's authority to re-sentence depends on the meaning of the word "sentence." Harrison, 113 F.3d at 138 (citing United States v. Binford, 108 F.3d 723, 728 (7th Cir. 1997)). In a § 2255 proceeding, the sentence refers to the aggregate, indivisible term of imprisonment and a "district court has the authority to restructure a defendant's entire sentence even when the prisoner's petition attacks the validity of just one of the counts of conviction." Binford, 108 F.3d at 728; See Harrison, 113 F.3d at 138 (concluding that once the district court vacated the term imposed by the erroneous gun conviction, it could correct the defendant's interdependent drug sentence).
Under existing Eighth Circuit precedent, the plain language of 28 U.S.C. § 2255, and in the interests of justice, the vacation of Count Three requires a new sentencing guideline calculation and a new sentencing hearing. The Court orders that the judgment be reopened for de novo consideration of the sentence to ensure that it remains adequate to satisfy the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a). The Clerk is directed to set this matter on for a re-sentencing hearing.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States Marshals Service transport Booker back to the district for the re-sentencing hearing.

References: v. 
 v. 
 § 2255
 § 2255
 v. 
 § 2255
 § 2255
 § 3553