US v. Savides, No. 87 CR 17-1.
| Court | United States District Courts. 7th Circuit. United States District Court (Northern District of Illinois) |
| Writing for the Court | Edward M. Genson, Genson, Steinback & Gillespie, Chicago, Ill., for defendant |
| Citation | 758 F. Supp. 466 |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America v. Christ SAVIDES. |
| Docket Number | No. 87 CR 17-1. |
| Decision Date | 05 March 1991 |
758 F. Supp. 466
UNITED STATES of America
v.
Christ SAVIDES.
No. 87 CR 17-1.
United States District Court, N.D. Illinois.
March 5, 1991.
Fred Foreman, U.S. Atty. by William Cook, Asst. U.S. Atty., Chicago, Ill., for plaintiff.
Edward M. Genson, Genson, Steinback & Gillespie, Chicago, Ill., for defendant.
ORDER
BUA, District Judge.
Defendant Christ Savides asks the court to reduce his sentence or, in the alternative, restructure his sentence in light of the findings of the Seventh Circuit in United States v. Pace, 898 F.2d 1218 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, Cialoni v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 110 S.Ct. 3286, 111 L.Ed.2d 795 (1990); Savides v. United States, ___ U.S. ___, 111 S.Ct. 210, 112 L.Ed.2d 170 (1990). For the reasons stated below, the court denies Savides' motion to reduce his sentence, but grants Savides' request to restructure his sentence.
Defendant Savides was convicted of one count of conspiracy to distribute and to possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance (Count I) in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846, six counts of delivery of a controlled substance or possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver (Counts II-VII) in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), and one count of engaging in a Continuing Criminal Enterprise ("CCE") in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 848 (Count VIII). The court sentenced Savides to ten years of imprisonment and a $100,000 fine on the conspiracy charge (Count I); ten years of imprisonment on each of the possession charges (Counts II-VII) to be served concurrently to that for the conspiracy charge, as well as a total of $300,000 in fines; and ten years of imprisonment on the CCE charge (Count VIII) to be served consecutively to the other sentences. Additionally, a fine of $100,000 was imposed on Count VIII. Subsequently, in Pace, 898 F.2d at 1218, the Seventh Circuit found, based on the government's confession of error, that consecutive sentences should not have been imposed for the conspiracy and CCE convictions. The Seventh Circuit remanded for resentencing.
On remand, the "trial judge must resentence according to the original sentencing intentions." United States v. Shue, 825 F.2d 1111, 1116 (7th Cir.), cert. denied, 484 U.S. 956, 108 S.Ct. 351, 98 L.Ed.2d 376 (1987). When imposing its original sentence, the court intended that
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Simms v. Oedekoven, 92-97
...497 U.S. 1030, 110 S.Ct. 3286, 111 L.Ed.2d 795 (1990), cert. denied 498 U.S. 878, 111 S.Ct. 210, 112 L.Ed.2d 170 (1990), on remand 758 F.Supp. 466 (N.D.Ill.1991) (due process). We can see no reason why the federal courts could not also find it compatible with the Eighth Amendment to the Con......