United States v. Karen Dooley
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 15520
7th Cir.2012Background
- Dooley lied about marriage status and income to obtain Social Security benefits and food stamps to which she was not entitled.
- While employed at a hospital, she stole credit cards and identifying documents from about 100 patients and used them to defraud others.
- She created spurious identities to obtain more credit cards and SSNs and continued the scheme while on pretrial release.
- She pleaded guilty to nine counts, including three counts of aggravated identity theft under §1028A and six fraud counts.
- The district court imposed sentences under §1028A that would be consecutive to, and potentially total up to, other sentences; the court did not apply Note 2(B) of §5G1.2 guidance.
- The appellate court held that plain error occurred for not applying Note 2(B) and remanded for resentencing with consideration of Note 2(B) and §3553(a).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Note 2(B) must govern §1028A sentencing | Dooley | Dooley | Yes; Note 2(B) controls |
| How §1028A sentences combine with other offenses | Guidelines require Note 2(B) considerations | Court may structure consecutive or concurrent sentences per Note 2(B) | Guidelines and statute align on considering Note 2(B) |
| Whether plain error occurred for failure to apply Note 2(B) | Plain error violated proper procedure | No reversible error emphasized | Yes; plain error occurred |
| Appropriate remedy on remand | Re-sentencing per Note 2(B) should determine consecutiveness | Discretion reposed in district court | Remand for resentencing with Note 2(B) guidance |
Key Cases Cited
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (U.S. 2007) (advisory nature of Guidelines; need to follow sentencing procedures)
- Rita v. United States, 551 U.S. 338 (U.S. 2007) (requires consideration of §3553(a) on appeal; standard of review)
- United States v. Roberson, 474 F.3d 432 (7th Cir. 2007) (guidelines interaction with mandatory statutory terms)
- United States v. Collins, 640 F.3d 265 (7th Cir. 2011) (comparison to similar §1028A sentencing; relevance to discretion)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (U.S. 1993) (plain error standard)