Opinion
Nos. 15-3575 15-3581
04-10-2018
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Thomas CURETON, Defendant-Appellant.
Nicholas J. Biersbach, Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Civil Division, Donald S. Boyce, Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Criminal Division, Fairview Heights, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee. Johanna M. Christiansen, Thomas W. Patton, Attorneys, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Peoria, for Defendant-Appellant.
Nicholas J. Biersbach, Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Civil Division, Donald S. Boyce, Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Criminal Division, Fairview Heights, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Johanna M. Christiansen, Thomas W. Patton, Attorneys, OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL PUBLIC DEFENDER, Peoria, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before Easterbrook, Kanne, and Hamilton, Circuit Judges.
ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Per Curiam.In his third round of appeals, we affirmed defendant Cureton's convictions and sentences for using a firearm during a crime of violence and related crimes. United States v. Cureton , 845 F.3d 323 (7th Cir. 2017). The Supreme Court remanded for reconsideration in light of Dean v. United States , ––– U.S. ––––, 137 S.Ct. 1170, 197 L.Ed.2d 490 (2017), which disapproved our circuit precedents such as United States v. Roberson , 474 F.3d 432 (7th Cir. 2007), barring judges sentencing defendants under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) and other crimes from considering the mandatory minimum sentence under § 924(c) when deciding the sentences for other crimes.
We then remanded to the district court for the limited purpose of giving that court an opportunity to determine whether it would have imposed the same sentence on Cureton, now knowing that in light of Dean , it may consider the mandatory sentence under § 924(c) when deciding the sentences for other crimes. United States v. Cureton , 882 F.3d 714 (7th Cir. 2018). The district court solicited and reviewed briefs from the parties and acted promptly.
On March 21, 2018, the district judge issued an order explaining that he saw no basis for reducing Cureton's sentence. Judge Herndon quoted his own comments in resentencing Cureton and Judge Murphy's comments at Cureton's original sentencing. Both judges focused on the extraordinary viciousness of Cureton's crimes, including the kidnapping and torture of the woman who was his victim. The order on limited remand referred to Cureton's "extreme" capacity for "violence and depravity" and said that any lower sentence would not be sufficient to serve the purposes of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).
The district court has complied with the terms of our limited remand. We see no need for further proceedings in this case on the subject of Dean . The judgments of the district court, including the 444-month total term of imprisonment, are
AFFIRMED.