Wednesday, January 03, 2007

U.S. v. Silva (9th Cir. - Jan. 3, 2007)

Since there are now a plethora of post-Booker sentencing remands, this case is fairly important. It concerns whether the defendant has a constitutional or statutory right to allocute -- i.e., to say something to the court -- before an Ameline sentencing review on remand. Judge O'Scannlain, not surprisingly, concludes "No."

But what a funny case in which this particular issue happens to arise. The defendant here -- Paul Silva, a resident of the great city of San Diego -- didn't want to allocute before to his initial sentencing anyway. And listen to the erudite bon mots he spontaneously utterred after the court announced his sentence: "No, way, man. Wait, I want to say something, dude. The maximum is five years, man.” Priceless.

I'll give you once guess, by the way, as to the crime for which the defendant was sentenced. You guessed it: importation of marijuana and possession with intent to distribute.

Lay off the bong, my fellow San Diegan. Too much definitely rots the brain.