United States v. Rosas, Freddy , 161 F. App'x 602 ( 2006 )

UNPUBLISHED ORDER
Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53
United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit
Chicago, Illinois 60604
January 11, 2006
Before
Hon. WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge
Hon. JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge
Hon. DIANE S. SYKES, Circuit Judge
No. 04-2929
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appeal from the United States District
Plaintiff-Appellee, Court for the Eastern District of
Wisconsin.
v.
No. 03 CR 239
FREDDY ROSAS,
Defendant-Appellant. Rudolph T. Randa,
Chief Judge.
ORDER
After the Supreme Court held that the sentencing guidelines are advisory,
rather than mandatory as previously believed, United States v. Booker, 125 S.Ct.
738, 757 (2005), we ordered a limited remand to determine whether the district
court would have sentenced Rosas differently had it known that it was not bound by
the guidelines. See United States v. Paladino, 401 F.3d 471, 481 (7th Cir.2005). The
district judge has replied stating that he would like the opportunity to resentence
the defendant in light of the now-advisory nature of the guidelines. Specifically,
Judge Randa informed this court that, had he known that the guidelines were
advisory at the time Rosas was sentenced, he “would have looked at the sentencing
differently and taken into consideration the factors contained in 18 U.S.C. § 3553.”
No. 04-2929 Page 2
We invited the parties to file arguments concerning the reasonableness of the
sentences, however, neither party accepted that invitation.
Because the district court’s statement evinces plain error in Rosas’ sentence,
see United States v. Askew, 417 F.3d 648, 649 (7th Cir. 2005), we hereby VACATE
Rosas’ original sentence and REMAND this matter to the district court for
resentencing. See Paladino, 401 F.3d at 484.