Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lisa TONEY, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-04-12
Citations: 177 F. App'x 486
Docket Number: No. 03-2337
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lisa TONEY, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before Hon. WILLIAM J. BAUER, Hon. RICHARD D. CUDAHY, and Hon. DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 177
Pages: 486–487

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lisa TONEY, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-2337.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
April 12, 2006.
Lawrence S. Beaumont, Office of the United States Attorney, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Robert A. Handelsman, Chicago, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before Hon. WILLIAM J. BAUER, Hon. RICHARD D. CUDAHY, and Hon. DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER
Lisa Toney and her boyfriend used her husband's name and identifying information to commit fraud. He found out, so they blew him up with a mail bomb, injuring another man in the process. Toney was convicted of conspiracy to use fraudulent identification, see 18 U.S.C. § 1028(f); fraudulent use of an access device, see id. § 1029(a)(2); mail theft, see id. § 1708; and conspiracy to use explosives in commission of a felony resulting in death, see id. § 844(n), (d). The district court imposed multiple concurrent terms of imprisonment, the longest of which was life.
Toney appealed, arguing that the district court plainly erred by applying the sentencing guidelines as mandatory. See United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005); United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471, 481 (7th Cir.2005). We asked the judge whether he would have imposed a lower sentence if he had known that the guidelines were advisory. See Paladino, 401 F.3d at 483-84. He answered yes. Therefore, we VACATE Toney's sentence and REMAND for re-sentencing.