United States v. Ramirez; United States v. Ocampo-Pineda; United States v. Mandujano-Gonzalez, No. 09-3932 (7th Cir. 2011)Annotate this Case
The three defendants in this consolidated case were Mexican nationals who were living in the United States illegally. At issue was what evidentiary showing must a defendant, charged with being found in the United States after previously having been deported, 8 U.S.C. 1326(a), make before a district court was obliged to consider his request for a lower sentence to account for the absence of a fast-track program in that judicial district. The court held that a district court need not address a fast-track argument unless defendant had shown that he was similarly situated to persons who actually would receive a benefit in a fast-track district. Until defendant met these preconditions, his "disparity" argument was illusory and could be passed over in silence. Accordingly, the court concluded that the fast-track arguments made by all three defendants were illusory and could be passed over in silence. Therefore, the court affirmed each sentence; one defendant's sentence, however, was modified to clarify that his participation in the Inmate Financial Responsibility Program was voluntary.
The court issued a Revised version of this opinion on December 23, 2011. The court issued a Revised version of this opinion on December 27, 2011. The court issued a Revised version of this opinion on January 6, 2012. The court issued a Revised version of this opinion on March 15, 2012.