Pleased to be writing with a good decision this week, that rejects an obstruction enhancement and sends the case back for resentencing. (For a case where the defendant received a sentence ten years below the guideline range! (50%!))Dissenting Judge Graber is displeased. As I note in the COTW memo, she protests that the majority's outcome means that any obstruction case with inadequate findings now merits a per se reversal -- plain error be damned.(And she might be right).Before we gloat too much, Judge Silverman, author of the majority decision, isn't exactly enthused about the Ninth authority that produces this result. There's a vague "en banc" feel to the majority discussion (and a definite feel to Judge Graber's dissent). Let's hope the Ninth doesn't revisit this little corner of good sentencing law.
United States v. Harrera-Rivera
Monday, August 15, 2016