Court Opinion

ID: 9560002
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-21 17:40:39.189067+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:11:57.763987
License: Public Domain

KOZINSKI, Chief Judge, with whom KLEINFELD, Circuit Judge, joins, concurring in relevant part:
I join Judge Rymer’s opinion with the understanding that it affirms Carty’s within-Guidelines sentence by invoking a presumption that within-Guidelines sentences are “reasonable.” Despite the opinion’s quixotic claim that it “decline[s] to embrace a presumption [of reasonableness],” maj. op. at 994, it’s clear that this is precisely what the opinion does. After disposing of Carty’s procedural objections, see id. at 994-96, the opinion devotes few words to the reasonableness of his sentence; it affirms because “we see nothing unusual about Carty’s circumstances to compel a lower sentence.” Id. at 996.
When a sentence is within the Guidelines range, we know that “both the sentencing judge and the Sentencing Commission ... have reached the same conclusion” that the sentence is “proper.” Rita v. United States, — U.S. -, 127 S.Ct. 2456, 2463, 168 L.Ed.2d 203 (2007). We must presume that such a sentence is reasonable, and we can rest on this presumption unless we are shown something “unusual” that “compels]” a different conclusion. Maj. op. at 996. Judge Rymer does this here, so I’m pleased to join.