United States v. Ronald Desmond Scampini

Good Law
911 F.2d 350
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 2, 199089-50378California1,536 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallace, J.

Scampini appeals from the sentence imposed by the district court following his conviction for bank robbery in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2113 (a). He challenges the constitutionality of the Sentencing Guidelines (Guidelines), contending (1) that the Guidelines violate the due process clause of the fifth amendment by restricting a sentencing court’s ability to provide individualized sentencing; and (2) that the Guidelines violate the presentment clauses in article I, section 7 of the Constitution. The district court exercised jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231 . We have jurisdiction over this timely appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We affirm.

I

Both of Scampini’s arguments require us to address questions of constitutional law and thus our standard of review is de novo. United States v. McConney, 728 F.2d 1195, 1201 (9th Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 469 U.S. 824 , 105 S.Ct. 101 , 83 L.Ed.2d 46 (1984).

Scampini’s argument that the Guidelines violate the due process clause of the fifth amendment by limiting the district court’s ability to impose an individualized sentence is foreclosed by our recent decision in United States v. Brady, 895 F.2d 538 (9th Cir.1990). In…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.