Sentencing Guidelines Archives – The Federal Docket

United States v. Rosa Enedia Pazos Cingari, et al. (11th Cir. March 2020)

In a case involving mail fraud and falsifying immigration forms, the Court held that the district court correctly applied the Guidelines for fraud under 2B1.1 rather than for falsifying immigration forms under 2L2.1, explaining that "the heart" of the defendant's scheme was enriching themselves by cheating undocumented immigrants.

United States v. Rodolfo Rodriguez-Leos (5th Cir. March 2020)

Sentencing Guidelines

The defendant was convicted of unlawful possession of ammunition by a person admitted to the U.S. on a nonimmigrant visa. Law enforcement had witnessed the defendant purchasing ammunition and leaving it in locations to be picked up and eventually smuggled into Mexico. At sentencing, the district court applied the enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(6)(A) based on the defendant’s intent to transport the ammunition out of the U.S. Since the ammunition was possessed in connection with another offense, exporting the ammunition without a valid export license, § 2K2.1(c)(1) directed the court to cross reference to § 2X1.1 (Attempt, Solicitation, or Conspiracy).

The district court declined to apply the three-level reduction under § 2X1.1(b)(1), which applies when the offense constitutes a mere attempt, based on the PSR’s assertion that the defendant had “completed all the acts necessary and, but for the apprehension, was able to complete all the acts.”

On appeal, the Court reversed, holding that the district court had committed clear error. First, the Court held that the defendant’s written objection to the PSR was sufficient to preserve his claim on appeal, despite the defendant citing the incorrect subsection. The Court then held that the defendant had not “completed all the acts necessary given the lack of evidence that he knew the guns were being smuggled and the fact that he was apprehended “well before” he and his co-conspirators had completed the acts necessary for exporting the ammunition without a license.

Appeal from the Southern District of Texas

Opinion by Dennis, joined by Graves and Willett

Click here to read the opinion.

United States v. Maria Soly Almonte (2d Cir. March 2020)

The Court affirmed the defendant's sentence as procedurally reasonable. The sentencing court did not err by considering the defendant's false testimony under the 3553 factors despite not finding that she obstructed justice under USSG 3C1.1.

United States v. Tremayne James (3rd Cir. March 2020)

The Court affirmed the defendant's sentence, holding that the defendant's prior conviction for loitering under Pennsylvania law was not "loitering" or an "offense similar to" loitering under the Guidelines because the Pennsylvania offense requires proving criminal intent.

United States v. Tyrone Mitchell (3rd Cir. December 2019)

The Court held that the sentencing court committed plain and reversible error when it relied on the defendant’s “bare arrest record” in determining a sentence, as the sentencing court had only cited the Defendant’s “extensive criminal history” without adequately distinguishing between adjudications, convictions, and mere arrests.