U.S. v. Gupta, 2009 WL 1749046 (11th Cir. June 23, 2009)
The defendants were convicted of conspiracy to submit false Medicare claims. This third appeal involves fundamental errors about the sentencing of the Defendant, Gupta, and whether to reassign the case to a Fourth District Judge for sentencing. The court not only failed to calculate loss, but also, erroneously, it reduced the defendant’s offense level by two points for acceptance of responsibility. Because it employed an arbitrary approach, the District Court did not identify a basis for the loss found. Moreover, the court credited the defendant with two points for accepting responsibility but the defendant continuously challenged and contested the government and made clear that he thought he was innocent.
The District Court imposed an unreasonable sentence.
The court believed that the District Court’s refusal to set aside its feelings is more pronounced after a third appeal and second reassignment request, therefore, to preserve in the public mind the image of absolute impartiality and fairness of the judiciary, the case had to be reassigned.
