Court Opinion

ID: 9808515
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 20:40:18.909063+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:12:17.924293
License: Public Domain

*1278CORRIGAN, District Judge,
concurring in the result:
Eighty-seven months imprisonment is a very long sentence in an illegal reentry case where this Court has previously determined that the guidelines range is 21-27 months. I was concerned that, in arriving at the exact same 87 month sentence on remand that he had previously imposed (the high end of the now-discredited guidelines range), the district judge did not pay sufficient heed to this Court’s decision and did not consider the guidelines as corrected. However, Rosales-Bruno has not asserted this ground, or any other procedural irregularity, on appeal. As to the only ground actually raised on appeal, whether the 87 month sentence is substantively reasonable, I agree that the “sentence did not exceed the outer bounds of the wide range of discretion that district courts are afforded.” Maj. Op. at 1273. Thus, I concur in the result. I think it unnecessary to the decision and unwise for me, as a visitor, to join in the important debate between Chief Judge Carnes and Judge Wilson regarding Eleventh Circuit sentencing precedent.