Court Opinion

ID: 9437588
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-03 04:21:53.629485+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:47:05.544418
License: Public Domain

EBEL, Circuit Judge,
dissenting in part.
Although I agree with most of the majority opinion in this case, I respectfully dissent on the analysis of Mr. Stringham’s claim of non-constitutional Booker error. Because the district court sentenced at the bottom of a range that the court perceived to be a mandatory range at the time of sentencing, and because there is nothing in this record to contradict the inference that the district court therefore felt constrained in how low it could go in sentencing Mr. Stringham, I believe the third and fourth prongs of Olano have been satisfied. I would remand for resentencing under Booker.