Opinion ID: 705069
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Request for Reassignment and Summary.

Text: 45 Stevens requests that we reassign this case to a different district judge because the district judge failed to follow this Court's instructions after the first appeal, invoking United States v. Robin, 553 F.2d 8 (2d Cir.1977) (in banc) (per curiam). The apportionment question, however, is a quite novel legal issue. Moreover, the fine and supervised release questions were not reached as an apparent result of an oversight which no counsel undertook to address. We perceive no basis for a reassignment. 46 On remand, the district court is instructed: 47 (1) to conduct a hearing, if Stevens so moves, to determine whether Stevens knowingly and voluntarily waived his right to appeal the allocation of prison terms under Sec. 3147; 48 (a) If the court determines that Stevens knowingly and voluntarily made the agreement to waive appeal, the court need not alter the prison term allocation of the original sentence. 49 (b) If the court determines that Stevens did not knowingly and voluntarily waive appeal, the court shall, at the government's option, either 50 (i) vacate the entire sentence agreement contained in the Stipulation and proceed to sentence anew; or 51 (ii) apportion the 293 month period of imprisonment so that the portion attributed to the offenses of conviction is within the range of level 34 (the level that would obtain absent the three-level increase under Sec. 2J1.7), and the remainder, imposed consecutively, not exceeding ten years, is within the range attributable to a three-level enhancement above level 34. 52 (2) to give Stevens an opportunity to show whether, or to what extent, he is financially unable to pay a fine, Stevens I, 985 F.2d at 1189, before reimposition of any fine; and 53 (3) as to any contemplated term of supervised release in excess of five years, to provide a prior notice informing [Stevens] that the court is planning a departure of this type, ... [and] at least a brief statement of the reasons for the departure and its extent. Id. (citing United States v. Marquez, 941 F.2d 60, 64-65 (2d Cir.1991)).