Court Opinion

ID: 9494309
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 15:34:50.788661+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:56:20.739309
License: Public Domain

WELLFORD, Circuit Judge,
concurring.
I concur in the court’s judgment of affir-mance despite my reservations concerning *499the involvement of the district judge in discussion with counsel and ambiguous indications about the propriety of a fifty-one month term at a “status conference.”1 Markin’s fraud clearly exceeded the $1,000,000 figure with little or no indication of remorse; the sentence imposed was fully justified.
It seems clear that the district judge in fact did consider objections made to the presentence report, but connected with the bank fraud in this case was also extensive bankruptcy fraud as well. Markin’s counsel, in any event, had the opportunity to examine the pertinent documents with respect to any effectual challenge to a lengthy affidavit and a thorough presen-tence report concerning defendant’s admitted fraudulent conduct.2

. The government concedes in its brief (p. 4) that by the end of the session “counsel for Markin was attempting to negotiate a sentence directly with the district court.” The judge simply should have made it plain that no such effort was appropriate.

. The district court, indeed, advised Markin’s counsel "certainly you have the right under the Rules to subpoena what you can't get voluntarily.” (J/A at 99.)