DOJ-OGR-00021564.jpg

20 a1 22 23 24 25 Case 22-1426, Document ON 388 3536039, Page134 of 217 Me6eSQmaxl correct calculation is 360 argues that a guideline sent fC to 660 months' 19 imprisonment and is warranted. The probation department has calculated the range at 292 to 365 months’ imprison variance to a term of 240 m Counsel, carefully. [ have a few qu ment, but onths' estions need to hear repetition of be happy to give you an opp your writt I want recommends a downward imprisonment. I have reviewed your written arguments I don't to ask, but ten arguments, but I would ortunity to add anything beyond your submission if you'd like to make any additional arguments. T'll hear from you MR. EVERDELL: Tha now, Mr. nk you, Everdell. your Honor. [ will largely rely on my written submissions. just would like to amplify one or two things. Your Honor, our initial argument, of course, is that the Court must resolve who which book lik determines guidelines book guidelines. is when the offens applies: We argue that that is a the issue implicates the Ex Post Facto Clause. to make the determination about conduct ended, which the 2003 or 2004 jury determination because So the 2003 guidelines must apply because the jury was never asked to make familiar with the arguments we that factual determination. I know your Honor is raised. I would just point out that the government in their response really did not engage with our arguments about the SOUTHE RN D STR CT REPORTERS, PeGu 0 12) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00021564