Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part
United States v. Gonzales
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
Decided November 5, 2007No. 04-30007Published
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partIkuta, Circuit Judge
In parts II and III of the majority’s opinion, the majority equates the undefined phrase “term of imprisonment” and the defined term “sentence of imprisonment.” Because this is contrary to the plain language of the Guidelines, I dissent.
I
In 2002, Emilio Gonzales was sentenced to thirty days in jail — which jail time was completely suspended — on a conviction for driving with a suspended license. At sentencing on the instant offense, the district court added a criminal-history point for this 2002 conviction, pursuant to § 4A1.1(c) of the Guidelines.
Section 4A1.1(c) instructs courts to “[a]dd 1…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Alabama v. SheltonSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Richard Adams Hovey v. Robert L. Ayers, Jr., Acting Warden, California State Prison at San QuentinCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2006
- Securities and Exchange Commission v. Kevin Michael McCarthy Thomas William BlodgettCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2003
- United States v. Kendal Ray Williams, AKA Wren, AKA Paris CarpenterCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2002
- United States v. Reggie BerryCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1987
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.