The government further disputes theĭistrict court's Sentencing Guidelines calculations. § 2252(b)(1) on the ground that applying suchĪ punishment to this immature 19-year-old defendant would violate the Cruel and Unusual
The government contends that the district court erred in refusing to impose the minimumįive-year prison term mandated by 18 U.S.C. The Jjudgment of conviction as sentenced Reingold to 30 months' incarceration. The United States now appeals from that part of
Weinstein, Judge) to one count of distributing child CASSIDY, Appeals Bureau, Federal Defenders of New York, Inc., New York, New York, for Defendant-Appellee.Ĭorey Reingold pleaded guilty in the United States District Court for the Easternĭistrict of New York (Jack B. Lynch, United States Attorney for the Eastern District of New York, Brooklyn, New York, for Appellant. Judge Sack concurs in a separate opinion.ĪLI KAZEMI (Amy Busa, on the brief), Assistant United States Attorneys, for Loretta E. On the ground that it constituted cruel and unusual punishment as applied to this defendant,Īnd (2) not applying certain Sentencing Guidelines enhancements in calculating defendant's § 2252(b)(1) *ġ The Clerk of Court is directed to amend the official caption as shown above. (1) refusing to impose the five-year minimum sentence mandated by 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2), the United StatesĬhallenges defendant's 30-month prison sentence, arguing that the district court erred in To one count of distributing child pornography, see 18 U.S.C. On appeal from a judgment of conviction entered in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Weinstein, Judge), following defendant's guilty plea 11-2826-cr UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellant, â€"v.â€" COREY REINGOLD, Defendant-Appellee.* UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT August Term, 2011 (Argued: Decided: September 26, 2013) Docket No.
0 kommentar(er)
