« Recap of Weekend Postings | Main | Law - Blakely Updates »

Monday, August 02, 2004

Indiana Decisions - 7th Circuit Issues Two Rulings

USA v. Ohlinger, John D. (WD Wis.)

Before FLAUM, Chief Judge, and MANION and KANNE, Circuit Judges.
FLAUM, Chief Judge. In 2003, John Ohlinger pled guilty to one count of transporting a visual depiction of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. Ohlinger was subsequently sentenced to 360 months’ imprisonment and he now appeals this sentence. For the reasons stated herein, we remand the case for resentencing. * * *

In March 2003, Ohlinger pled guilty to one count of transporting a visual depiction of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. In exchange, the government then dropped its second charge against Ohlinger, which was for knowing possession of more than two depictions of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This count was based upon a search of Ohlinger’s residence that the government contends uncovered more than 1,131 images of child pornography. According to Ohlinger’s plea agreement, all of his relevant conduct could be used to determine his sentence. Due to the district judge’s finding that Ohlinger’s conduct was the “most egregious, perhaps more so than any similar case” the judge had seen, Ohlinger was sentenced to 360 months’ imprisonment. Ohlinger now appeals his sentence. * * *

As this Court recently determined in United States v. Booker, the Supreme Court’s decision in Blakely v. Washington calls into doubt the constitutionality of the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines. Under Blakely as interpreted in Booker, a defendant has the right to have a jury decide factual issues that will increase the defendant’s sentence. As Booker holds, the Guidelines’s contrary assertion that a district judge may make such factual determinations based upon the preponderance of the evidence runs afoul of the Sixth Amendment. In this case, the district judge made several factual findings and used these findings to support sentence enhancements for distributing pornographic images with the expectation of receiving other images and engaging in a pattern of activity involving the sexual abuse of minors. We therefore must remand Ohlinger’s case to the district judge for resentencing in light of Booker. [Cites omitted]

Cook, Ronald L. v. Commonwealth Edison (ND Ill.)
Before FLAUM, Chief Judge, and BAUER and MANION, Circuit Judges.
MANION, Circuit Judge. The appellants, current or retired employees of Commonwealth Edison Company (“ComEd”), appeal from a decision of the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois to deny their motion for leave to file a second amended complaint. Also at issue, however, is the jurisdiction of that court to consider the motion. For the reasons set forth below, we conclude that the district court had jurisdiction to consider the motion, but that under the unique circumstances of this case, it was an abuse of discretion to deny the appellants leave to file a second amended complaint. * * * Reversed.

Posted by Marcia Oddi on August 2, 2004 12:13 PM
Posted to Indiana Decisions