Case Name: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeffrey L. GOLDBERG, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2005-08-29
Citations: 146 F. App'x 64
Docket Number: No. 03-3955
Parties: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeffrey L. GOLDBERG, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before POSNER, ROVNER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 146
Pages: 64–65

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jeffrey L. GOLDBERG, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 03-3955.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Aug. 29, 2005.
John T. Ryan, Office of the United States Attorney, Chicago, IL, for PlaintiffAppellee.
Jed Stone, Stone & Associates, Waukegan, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before POSNER, ROVNER, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
ORDER
After concluding that the district court correctly calculated the range under the Sentencing Guidelines, this court ordered a limited remand so that the district court could inform us whether he considers the sentence he imposed to be appropriate, given that the guidelines are no longer mandatory. See United States v. Booker, — U.S. -, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005); United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471 (7th Cir.2005).
The court judge has informed us that he would impose the same sentence under the advisory guidelines. Sentence ranges properly calculated under the Guidelines are presumptively reasonable, see United States v. Mykytiuk, 415 F.3d 606 (7th Cir.2005), and the defendant has not filed a response and therefore has not rebutted that presumption. Nor does our indepen dent review suggest that the sentence is unreasonable.
The judgment is therefore AFFIRMED.