Wednesday, November 21, 2007

U.S. v. Garcia et al, No. 05-30356 (11-19-07). A promise made is the sentence to be paid. A specific stipulated sentence generally is a jurisdictional bar. Defendants here were sentenced pursuant to a stipulated sentencing range under Rule 11(c)(1)(C). The actual sentence was within the range, but towards the high end. The 9th Cir. found the sentence bars an appeal, and divests the court of jurisdiction to challenges to the guidelines and reasonableness. The stipulation settles it. (Although unconstitutional reasons should still allow such an appeal). As for supervised release issues for a codefendant, a financial disclosure condition is appropriate for a drug trafficking offense, especially if there is a leadership role, or a financial laundering aspect. The drug testing number must have a minimum (here one) and a maximum, construed here as three. The court, not the p.o., must set the number.


Post a Comment

<< Home