Court Opinion

ID: 9414470
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-02 00:26:04.292292+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:16:46.970982
License: Public Domain

TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
TJOFLAT, Circuit Judge.
The district court sentenced Joseph under a sentencing model that differs materially from the model Booker creates. See United States v. Rodriguez, 406 F.3d 1261, 1281 (11th Cir.2005) (Tjoflat, J., dissenting from denial of rehearing en banc) (explaining the difference between sentencing preBooker and post -Booker.) The difference in the two models is so fundamental, and so striking, that the district judge in this case could not possibly have imagined what it would have been like to sentence Joseph using the new, Booker model. Among other things, the judge would have had to weigh, take appropriately into account, and make findings regarding the four sentencing objectives set out in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)(2). What evidence the parties, especially the defendant, may have presented touching on these objectives we can hardly surmise, much less know. Finding harmless error under these circumstances is, in my view, purely arbitrary.
I would vacate Joseph’s sentence and remand the case for resentencing.