DOJ-OGR-00021037.jpg

Case 22-1426, Document 58_02/28/2023, 3475901, Page211 of 221 A-411 36 MeSQmaxl MR. EVERDELL: No, your Honor. We rest on the papers. THE COURT: I thank you counsel for your thorough briefing. [ am prepared to rule. The defendant raises four objections to the calculation of As we the guideline range contained in the PSR. discussed, first, she argues I must apply the 2003 guidelines rather than the 2004 guidelines. Beyond that, she objects to The the application of three sentencing enhancements. government's sole objection to the calculation of the guidelines is that Virginia Roberts and Melissa should be will address the d considered victims. So I fens objections and then the government's objections. I begin by determining which of the Guideline manuals Generally, a sentencing court applies the version of apply. Fect on the date that the defendant is the guidelines in sentenced. 18 U.S.C. Section 3553(a) (4) (A) (11). But the defendant is sentenced Ex Post Facto Clause is violated if a committed her offense and under Guidelines issued after she's 19 the new Guidelines provide a higher sentencing range than the 20 version in place at the time of the offense. That's the 2] principle of a case called Peugh v. United States, 569 U.S. 530 22 (2013). In that case, a sentencing court must -- in the case 23 of a higher range at the time of sentencing than in place at 24 the time of the offense, in that case the sentencing court must 25 apply the guidelines in effect when the offense was committed. SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C.eee (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00021037