Duff v. United States - Response (Hold)

No. 06-1347

In the Supreme Court of the United States

JAMES M. DUFF, WILLIAM E. STRATTON,
AND TERRENCE DOLAN, PETITIONERS

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

MEMORANDUM FOR THE UNITED STATES

PAUL D. CLEMENT
Solicitor General
Counsel of Record
Department of Justice
Washington, D.C. 20530-0001
(202) 514-2217

In the Supreme Court of the United States

No. 06-1347

JAMES M. DUFF, WILLIAM E. STRATTON,
AND TERRENCE DOLAN, PETITIONERS

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT

MEMORANDUM FOR THE UNITED STATES

OPINIONS BELOW

Petitioner contends that, on review pursuant to United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), a federal court of appeals should not treat a sentence within the advisory Sentencing Guidelines range as presumptively reasonable. On November 3, 2006, this Court granted certiorari in Claiborne v. United States, No. 06-5618, and Rita v. United States, No. 06-5754, to address vari ous aspects of sentencing procedure under Booker, in cluding, in Rita, whether it is consistent with Booker to accord a presumption of reasonableness to within-Guide lines sentences. Accordingly, the petition for a writ of certiorari should be held pending the Court's resolution of Claiborne and Rita, and then disposed of as appropri ate in light of the decisions in those cases.1

Respectfully submitted.

PAUL D. CLEMENT
Solicitor General

APRIL 2007
* The government waives any further response to the petition unless this Court requests otherwise.