Court Opinion

ID: 9475067
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 05:16:30.359433+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:44:29.674086
License: Public Domain

ROSS, Circuit Judge,
dissenting.
The sentencing judge in this case was Judge John F. Nangle. At the sentencing hearing, Judge Nangle made a statement which I read as an assertion that he was not going to “get into” matters dealing with Hamilton and Rogers’ abuse of their kidnap victims and that he was “not going to take that or other things surrounding it into [his sentencing] decision.” See supra at 1346 (emphasis added). It must be presumed that Judge Nangle was aware of the sentencing statutes in general, and of FED. R.CRIM.P. 32(c)(3)(D) in particular. Judge Nangle’s sentencing statements should be read to favor a conclusion that he properly applied the sentencing statutes.
In my opinion sending this case back to Judge Nangle to restate his position in more definite language is a useless act and not likely to result in a change of the sentence of either Hamilton or Rogers.