Notification of Docket Entry — Motion for Relief Under Amendment 821 Denied — USA v. Smith (N.D. Ill., 2024-06-14)

Record facts

U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois · No. 1:20-cr-00922 · Doc. 71 · 2024-06-14 · Docket on CourtListener

Full text

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF NextGen 1.7.1.1
Eastern Division
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No.: 1:20−cr−00922
Honorable Manish S. Shah
Defendant.
NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY
This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Friday, June 14, 2024:
            MINUTE entry before the Honorable Manish S. Shah: The motion for relief under
Amendment 821 [66] is denied. Although the amended guideline range is lower than the
original range, the above−guidelines sentence of 48 months remains the sufficient but not
greater than necessary sentence after consideration of the Section 3553(a) factors. Neither
the original nor amended range adequately accounts for the seriousness of the offense
(e.g., the government program victim) or defendant's history and characteristics (a prior,
slightly below guidelines, federal sentence of 60 months that did not deter defendant).
Although a properly calculated guidelines range is a starting point, and variances need to
be justified, the guidelines range is not a mathematical anchor. The original sentence was
not arrived at by measuring its distance from the guidelines range. It was a holistic
determination, and the sentence is not harsher today because the guidelines are lower. The
sentence remains what it was: 48 months as a sufficient, but not greater than necessary,
measure of just punishment. Defendant's post−sentencing conduct is commendable but
does not persuade the court that a sentence below 48 months would be sufficient. Finally,
that the sentence is at a greater variance from the amended guidelines range than the
original range does not create an unwarranted disparity. Guideline sentences avoid
disparities, but there are times when the seriousness of the offense is a weightier
consideration when fashioning just punishment and rote adherence to avoiding disparity
through guideline sentencing would deprecate the seriousness of the offense. This is such
a case. Any disparity from other defendants with similar records who commit similar
crimes is entirely warranted here. Notices Mailed. (psm, )
ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was
generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and
criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please
refer to it for additional information.
Case: 1:20-cr-00922 Document #: 71 Filed: 06/14/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:477

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our
web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.
Case: 1:20-cr-00922 Document #: 71 Filed: 06/14/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:478

File and source

File

gov.uscourts.ilnd.394355.71.0.pdf

Size

18,648 bytes

SHA-256

e266c431f4d7d2af82fab84ba2469da0637a1b8a00c972071bf21ca9ccad0440

Our copy

gov.uscourts.ilnd.394355.71.0.pdf

Original

PACER (login required)