From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. v. Borden

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jun 2, 2006
No. 02 CRV. 929 (DLC) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 2, 2006)

Opinion

No. 02 CRV. 929 (DLC).

June 2, 2006


OPINION ORDER


Defendant James Borden has requested re-sentencing pursuant toUnited States v. Crosby, 397 F.3d 103 (2d Cir. 2005). Having considered the factors set forth in Title 18, United States Code, Section 3553(a), and the written submissions of the parties, the request is denied. If the Sentencing Guidelines had been understood to be advisory at the time sentence was imposed, the sentence imposed by this Court would not have been materially different. Based on an evaluation of Borden, gleaned not just from the sentencing submissions and the Pre-Sentence Report, but as significantly from the trial and his testimony at trial, the Court imposed a sentence at the top of the guidelines range. When sentencing within a guidelines range, the Court customarily imposes a sentence at the bottom of the range. Giving Borden a longer sentence was intended as a clear signal that Borden deserved a lengthy sentence, and specifically a sentence of 96 months. As described at the sentence, the Court was influenced by Borden's "consistent" and "constant" violation of the law, and the need to protect society, among other things. Accordingly it is hereby

ORDERED that the request for re-sentencing is denied.

SO ORDERED:


Summaries of

U.S. v. Borden

United States District Court, S.D. New York
Jun 2, 2006
No. 02 CRV. 929 (DLC) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 2, 2006)
Case details for

U.S. v. Borden

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. JAMES BORDEN, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, S.D. New York

Date published: Jun 2, 2006

Citations

No. 02 CRV. 929 (DLC) (S.D.N.Y. Jun. 2, 2006)