Opinion
CR 02-1168-PHX-DGC.
May 2, 2006
ORDER
Pursuant to the Judgment of the Ninth Circuit dated January 19, 2006, and the Memorandum issued by the Ninth Circuit on January 9, 2006, the Court held a hearing on May 1, 2006. The purpose of the hearing was to answer the following question: "whether the sentence imposed would have been materially different had the district court known that the guidelines were advisory." United States v. Ameline, 409 F.3d 1073, 1084 (9th Cir. 2005). The Court heard from defense counsel, Defendant, and counsel for the Government. Prior to the hearing the Court reviewed its previous sentencing decision, the presentence report, and the transcripts of sentencing hearings held on May 17 and 24, 2004.
Having considered these matters, the Court concluded that the sentence imposed in this case would not have differed materially had the Court been aware that the Guidelines were advisory. The basis for this conclusion was explained on the record.
As requested by defense counsel, the Court will recommend that Defendant be permitted to serve his supervised release in Wisconsin if suitable living arrangements can be made.