Opinion ID: 780717
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: An Error Was Committed

Text: 16 The Sentencing Guidelines explicitly mandate that a court use the version of the Guidelines in effect on the date of the defendant's sentencing. See U.S.S.G. § 1B1.11(a) (2002); see also Gonzalez, 281 F.3d at 45 (Generally, the Guidelines in effect on the date the defendant is sentenced should govern the sentence imposed.) (citing 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(4)(A)). The exception to this rule arises when the version of the Guidelines in effect at the time of sentencing is more `severe,' than the version in effect when the offense was committed. Id. (citation omitted). In such cases, there is an ex post facto problem and the earlier Guidelines should be applied. Id.; see also U.S.S.G. § 1B1.11(b)(1) (2002). Here, there was no ex post facto problem. Using the district court's $50,000 loss figure, Keigue's offense level under the 1998 Guidelines was 13. See U.S.S.G. §§ 2F1.1(b)(1)(F) and (b)(2)(B). Keigue's offense level under the 2001 Guidelines would have been 12. See supra n. 2. Consequently, it was error for the district court to calculate Keigue's offense level using the expired version of the Guidelines in effect on the date the offense was committed. 17