Court Opinion

ID: 9492854
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 14:51:54.385612+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:55:31.432059
License: Public Domain

WILSON, Chief District Judge,
dissenting in part:
In United States v. Johnson, 138 F.3d 115, 118 (4th Cir.1998), this court held that a reviewing court should “presume, in non-departures, unless some contrary indication exists, that a district court properly considered” statutory sentencing factors. Johnson, 138 F.3d at 119 (emphasis added). In my view, this is one of the rare cases where a “contrary indication” in the record signals that the district judge may not have considered the pertinent factors. At Legree’s original sentencing hearing, Judge Simons expressed particular discomfort with imposing a mandatory life sentence and indicated that, if he had the discretion, he would have imposed a lesser sentence:
[u]nder the facts as they are set forth in the presentence report, I don’t think I have any choice but to impose what the Guideline says and that is a life sentence .... I really never have been too happy with these Guidelines, but as long as I am operating as a judge, I have to accept them.... I surely feel this is a terrible thing for a man twenty-nine years old to be sent to prison for life without parole.... Maybe [the Fourth Circuit] can find some way to do something about this life sentence.
J.A. 100-101, 103. Approximately four years later, on September 29, 1997, Judge Simons denied Legree’s motion for a reduction of sentence in an order which reads, in its entirety, as follows:
*731This court concludes that Amendment 505 does not create a mandatory right to reduction of sentence for defendant. On consideration of the matter, this court concludes that defendant’s sentence was correct and that no reduction is appropriate.
J.A. 50. The contrast between these two pronouncements is striking, and it leaves me with the troubling notion that there has been an oversight. I would therefore reverse and remand with instructions to the district court to address Legree’s motion after reviewing the original sentencing hearing record.
In all other respects, I fully agree with the majority’s reasoning and decision.