U.S. v. SANCHEZ, 2:15CR00017-001. (2015)
Court: District Court, W.D. Louisiana
Number: infdco20160104427
Visitors: 7
Filed: Dec. 10, 2015
Latest Update: Dec. 10, 2015
Summary: MEMORANDUM RULING PATRICIA MINALDI , District Judge . Before the court are objections by the Government and the defense to the Presentence Report ("PSR") prepared by the Probation Department. The Government raised two objections. In the first, the Government objected that the initial PSR did not include a four-level increase for the specific offense characteristic in U.S.C.G. 2A2.2(b)(2)(B) for use of a dangerous weapon. In the second objection, the Government argued, that, pursuant to
Summary: MEMORANDUM RULING PATRICIA MINALDI , District Judge . Before the court are objections by the Government and the defense to the Presentence Report ("PSR") prepared by the Probation Department. The Government raised two objections. In the first, the Government objected that the initial PSR did not include a four-level increase for the specific offense characteristic in U.S.C.G. 2A2.2(b)(2)(B) for use of a dangerous weapon. In the second objection, the Government argued, that, pursuant to U..
More
MEMORANDUM RULING
PATRICIA MINALDI, District Judge.
Before the court are objections by the Government and the defense to the Presentence Report ("PSR") prepared by the Probation Department.
The Government raised two objections. In the first, the Government objected that the initial PSR did not include a four-level increase for the specific offense characteristic in U.S.C.G. § 2A2.2(b)(2)(B) for use of a dangerous weapon. In the second objection, the Government argued, that, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5G1.3, the sentence on the instant offense should be consecutive. Probation reviewed the PSR and concurred with the Government, amending the PSR to reflect the four-level increase and a recommendation that the sentence should run consecutively to the defendant's undischarged term of imprisonment. The defendant objected to this amendment to the PSR.
Having reviewed the PSR and the arguments of the Government and defense, the court concurs with the changes made to the PSR. The four level increase and a consecutive sentence is warranted in this case. The defendant's objections to the changes made to the PSR following the Government's objections are OVERRULED.
The remaining objections by the defendant do not impact the guidelines and do not require a ruling by the court.
Source: Leagle
