United States v. Rigoberto Santana

Santana appeals from his sentence imposed following a guilty plea for four counts of bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). Under the Sentencing Guidelines, his adjusted offense level was 21. Santana is in criminal history category IV. The sentencing range is from 57 to 71 months. Santana was sentenced to 63 months. Santana argues that the district court erred in sentencing him above the minimum guideline range.

The district court had jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 3231 . We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3742 and 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

Santana argues that the district court erred in considering a victim impact statement at the time of sentencing. Santana argues that consideration of the victim impact statement violates the Supreme Court’s holding in Booth v. Maryland, 482 U.S. 496 , 107 S.Ct. 2529 , 96 L.Ed.2d 440 (1987).

Booth concerned the consideration of victim impact statements by a jury during the capital punishment phase of a state murder trial. The Court held that such statements could inflame the jury and detract from the defendant’s moral culpability “in the unique circumstances of a capital sentence hearing.” Id.…