USA v. Martin Evanick, No. 13-3476 (7th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION To be cited only in accordance with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 Argued September 29, 2015 Decided October 5, 2015 Before No. 13- 3476 DIANE P. WOOD, Chief Judge FRANK H. EASTERBROOK, Circuit Judge KENNETH F. RIPPLE, Circuit Judge UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff- Appellee, v. MARTIN EVANICK, Defendant- Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Illinois. No. 12- 30291- 001- GPM G. Patrick Murphy, Judge. Order After pleading guilty to producing child pornography, 18 U.S.C. §2251(a), Martin Evanick was sentenced to 235 months’ imprisonment plus supervised release. He con- tests that sentence on appeal. The parties have agreed that a full resentencing is required by United States v. Thompson, 777 F.3d 368 (7th Cir. 2015), and its successors, such as United States v. Kappes, 782 F.3d 828 (7th Cir. 2015), because the district judge did not adequately discuss and justify the discretionary terms of supervised release. No. 13- 3476 Page 2 Evanick contends that we should go further and hold that 235 months is an unrea- sonably long term of imprisonment, even though it is within a properly calculated Guideline range. But it would be premature to address that subject. The district court will resentence Evanick, potentially with the benefit of an expanded record, and may choose a lower term of imprisonment. If the judge gives a term of 235 months or more (resentencing can lead to longer as well as shorter terms), that decision will be accom- panied by new reasons. And all of this will be done by a different district judge, the judge who imposed the existing sentence having retired. It is best to allow the district court to complete the process of resentencing before the court of appeals addresses any complaint about the reasonableness of the result. The judgment is vacated, and the case is remanded for resentencing.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
