Opinion ID: 1262661
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Duty to calculate the Guidelines range in each individual case

Text: In rendering the Guidelines advisory, the Supreme Court made clear that sentencing courts are required to consider the Guidelines in crafting a sentence. United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220, 245-46, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). Our Court thereafter provided district courts with a three-step process to follow in order to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling in Booker: (1) Courts must continue to calculate a defendant's Guidelines sentence precisely as they would have before Booker. (2) In doing so, they must formally rule on the motions of both parties and state on the record whether they are granting a departure and how that departure affects the Guidelines calculation, and take into account our Circuit's pre- Booker. case law, which continues to have advisory force. (3) Finally, they are to exercise their discretion by considering the relevant § 3553(a) factors in setting the sentence they impose regardless of whether it varies from the sentence calculated under the Guidelines. United States v. Gunter, 462 F.3d 237, 247 (3d Cir.2006) (quotation marks, brackets, and citations omitted); see also United States v. Hawk Wing, 433 F.3d 622, 631 (8th Cir.2006) (stating that courts should calculate Guidelines ranges just as they would have before Booker ); United States v. Crosby, 397 F.3d 103, 112 (2d Cir.2005) (The applicable Guidelines range is normally to be determined in the same manner as before Booker/Fanfan .). When a sentencing court miscalculates the applicable range, it fails to discharge its duties under step one of Gunter. As we made clear in United States v. Jackson , because the Guidelines still play an integral role in criminal sentencing, we require that the entirety of the Guidelines calculation be done correctly. 467 F.3d 834, 838 n. 4 (3d Cir.2006) (citations omitted).