United States Seventh Circuit

Conviction and sentence for attempted arson is affirmed where: 1) even if the government erred and made improper statements at closing, defendant was not prejudiced by the statements, and thus he failed to show a violation of his right to a fair trial or a Confrontation Clause violation; 2) no error occurred at sentencing and remand is unncessary as the court considered the guidelines range to be advisory, took into account defendant's apparent change in behavior and job history, and imposed a sentence below the guidelines range; and 3) the court properly considered defendant's acquitted conduct during sentencing as those actions had been proven by a preponderance of the evidence.

Appellate Information

• Argued 03/31/2009
• Decided 07/01/2009
• Published 07/01/2009

Judges

• MANION, Circuit Judge., Before FLAUM, MANION, and ROVNER, Circuit Judges.

Court

• United States Seventh Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellees:
  
• Angel M. Krull, Attorney (argued), Office of the United States Attorney, Chicago, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee., Michael J. Gonring, Attorney, Elizabeth Cassidy Perkins, Attorney (argued), Quarles & Brady, Milwaukee, WI, for Defendant-Appellant.