Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stewart Z. MUSA, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2006-02-01
Citations: 163 F. App'x 423
Docket Number: No. 04-3009
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stewart Z. MUSA, Defendant-Appellant.
Judges: Before Hon. WILLIAM J. BAUER, Hon. RICHARD A. POSNER, and Hon. ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 163
Pages: 423–424

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Stewart Z. MUSA, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 04-3009.
United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
Feb. 1, 2006.
Michelle L. Jacobs, Office of the United States Attorney, Milwaukee, WI, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Terence H. Campbell, Cotsirilos, Stephenson, Tighe & Streicker, Chicago, IL, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before Hon. WILLIAM J. BAUER, Hon. RICHARD A. POSNER, and Hon. ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
Stewart Musa was sentenced to 27 months' imprisonment for transporting child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(1). On appeal, he argued that the district court erred by sentencing him under the mandatory sentencing guidelines, see United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (7th Cir.2005). In response to the government's motion, we ordered a limited re mand under the terms set forth in United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471 (7th Cir.2005), for a determination whether the district court would have imposed the same sentence had it understood that the guidelines were advisory.
The district judge has replied that he would have imposed a different sentence if the sentencing guidelines had been advisory when Musa was sentenced. We invited the parties to file position statements concerning the proper disposition of the case. Only Musa has responded, and he concurs with the district court that resentencing is appropriate. Accordingly,
IT IS ORDERED that Musa's sentence is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED to the district court for resentencing.