Opinion ID: 44269
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Limited Resentencing

Text: Although DeSoto’s original sentence was vacated, the DeSoto I panel clearly stated that none of the sentencing issues DeSoto raised in the first appeal had any merit, except the drug-quantity issue. Because, for judicial economy purposes it is better for the district court not to redo that which was done properly at the first sentencing, this Court has held that there is “nothing improper” in the district court limiting the scope of the resentencing proceeding. United States v. Tamayo, 80 F.3d 1514, 1520 (11th Cir. 1996) (internal quotation marks and 9 citation omitted). Consequently, the district court did not err in limiting its resentencing consideration to the drug-quantity issue.3