US v Moreno :: essays research papers

get together States vs. Carlos Alfonso MorenoOn July 12, 2004, Carlos Alfonso Moreno appeared in front the United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit. He brought before the court an appeal challenging the district courts tally of his sentencing under the United States Sentencing Guideline. The panel determined after reviewing his case that an oral exam argument would not be necessary. They were able to look at the expound of his case and make their decision.Mr. Moreno was charged in district court with heterogeneous drug offenses and with being a felon in possession of a firearm. He entered a guilty plea to possession with intent to hand more than fifty grams of a substance containing a detectable do of methamphetamine and possession of a firearm by a verboten personIn the pre-sentence report recommending Mr. Morenos sentence, the Probation Officer added a point to his sad memorial score as a result of kinfolk 2001 convictions for madcap with a suspended license and for unsafe turning or stopping. For this ahead offense, Mr. Moreno was sentenced to sextuplet months in jail, with all but five days suspended, and six months of probation. The Probation Officer justified the addition of this point by citing the sentencing guidelines, which direct that sentences for less(prenominal) than sixty days should be given one point. The Probation Officer past determined that Mr. Morenos vile history points fundamentaled ten, placing him at the bottom of criminal history category. The district court agreed with this result and calculated Mr. Morenos total adjusted offense level to be twenty-five. The court subsequently sentenced Mr. Moreno to atomic number 6 months in prison, which is at the bottom of the 100 to 125 month course for an offense level twenty-five and criminal history category 5. On appeal, Mr. Moreno asserts the district court erred by adding a point to his criminal history for the earlier sentence. Absent the additional point, Mr. More no would have been in a overthrow criminal history category and hence could have been subjected to a shorter sentence. However, because Mr. Moreno failed to rising slope an objection before the district court regarding the additional point for the September 2001 sentence, his sentencing stood.