United States v. Juju Jiang, 471 F. App'x 85

Jiang pled guilty to one count of mail fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1341.
District Court sentenced Jiang to 41 months' imprisonment, to run concurrently with a Queens County sentence.
District Court did not adjust Jiang's sentence to account for time already served on the Queens sentence.
Jiang requested a § 5G1.3(b)(1) adjustment for undischarged time on the related state sentence.
The government opposed applying § 5G1.3; the court reserved discretion to structure a partially concurrent sentence under § 5G1.3(c).
On appeal, Jiang argued the district court abused its discretion by not applying § 5G1.3(b)(1).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether § 5G1.3(b)(1) applies	Jiang contends undischarged time should be credited under § 5G1.3(b)(1).	The Government argues § 5G1.3(b)(1) is inapplicable because the related state sentence did not drive the offense level increase.	§ 5G1.3(b) does not apply; no abuse of discretion.
Whether the district court could rely on § 5G1.3(c) for partial concurrency	Jiang argues no discretion to adjust for undischarged time should be exercised.	Court can exercise discretion under § 5G1.3(c) to fashion a partially concurrent sentence.	District court did not abuse discretion; § 5G1.3(c) permitted partial concurrency.
Was possible § 5G1.3(b) applied even if not basis for offense level increase	Undischarged time should be credited regardless of offense-level basis.	If not the basis for the increase, § 5G1.3(b) does not apply.	Not applicable; court properly declined § 5G1.3(b).

United States v. Brennan, 395 F.3d 59 (2d Cir. 2005) (test for § 5G1.3 applicability and de novo/legal review)
United States v. Velasquez, 136 F.3d 921 (2d Cir. 1998) (clear error standard for factual findings under § 5G1.3)
Sims v. Blot, 534 F.3d 117 (2d Cir. 2008) (abuse of discretion standard in sentencing)
United States v. Cavera, 550 F.3d 180 (2d Cir. 2008) (support for discretion in sentencing adjustments)