Legal Document

Cite as: 555 U. S. ____ (2009) 1 Per Curiam SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES LAWRENCE W. NELSON, AKA ZIKEE v. ON PETITION FOR WRIT CERTIORARI TO APPEALS FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 08–5657. Decided January 26, 2009 PER CURIAM. Lawrence Nelson was convicted of one count conspir acy to distribute and possess with intent more than 50 grams cocaine base. See 21 U.S. C. §846. The District Court calculated Nelson’s sentencing range under the United States Sentencing Guidelines, im posed a sentence 360 months in prison (the bottom range). During sentencing, judge explained that Fourth Circuit precedent, “ ‘the Guidelines are considered presumptively reasonable,’ ” so ‘unless there’s good reason [statutory sentencing] fac tors . , Guideline is reasonable sen tence.’ Pet. for Cert. 10. Appeals affirmed conviction sentence. Nelson, 237 Fed. Appx. 819 (2007) (per curiam). It noted within-Guidelines sentences presump tively reasonable, rejected argument Court’s reliance on presumption error. Id., at 821. filed petition writ certiorari. We granted petition, vacated judgment, remanded case further consideration light Rita States, 551 338 (2007). 552 ___ (2008). On remand without briefing, again 276 331 (2008) court acknowledged 2 NELSON Rita, while courts appeals “may apply reasonableness district reflects proper application Guidelines,” U.S., 347, “the does not enjoy benefit legal tence should apply,” id., 351. Instead, must first calculate range, then consider what appropriate individual defendant statutory factors, 18 §3553(a), explaining any variance from former reference latter. Nonetheless, upheld sentence, finding did treat as “mandatory” but rather understood they were only advisory. Appx., 333. has certiorari, reasserting, inter alia, essentially same he made before us time: statements clearly indicate it impermissibly applied his range. admits erred rejecting following our remand; we agree. Our cases do allow presume within applicable reasonable. In said much, fairly explicit terms: “We repeat an appellate presumption. [T]he apply.” And Gall (2007), reiter ated judges, considering how various factors defen dant, reasonable.” (slip op., 11–12). this case, quoted above language anyway 3 after Judge mandatory. That true, beside point. mandatory courts; also be presumed rea sonable. think plain comments sonableness Under recent precedents, constitutes certiorari motion leave proceed forma pauperis granted. judgment reversed, proceedings consistent opinion. ordered. BREYER, J., concurring JUSTICE whom ALITO joins, con curring judgment. Solicitor General confessed erred. Given nature error, General’s confession, I would grant vacate judg ment Appeals, proceedings.

Classification Label: 0