United States v. Bliss, No. 06-3039-cr., 2007 WL 3196346 (2d Cir. Oct. 30, 2007)
Sometimes you win. Sometimes you lose. In Bliss' case, he both won and lost at the same time. No harm, no foul, though. He ended up in the same place.
Bliss initially pled guilty to 11 counts of an indictment charging a litiny of sex crimes involving children. In February 2004 the district court sentenced him to 264 months imprisonment, smack-dab in the middle of his Guidelines range of 235 to 293 months imprisonment. The Second Circuit reversed in November 2005, finding that the district court improperly applied the obstruction of justice enhancement, and for consideration of whether to resentence pursuant to Booker.
At resentencing, the district court removed the enhancement for obstruction of justice. But it also declined to apply the 3-level reduction for acceptance of responsibility. Now, the district court had solid grounds for doing so. After all, the Second Circuit had directed that Bliss' "flight from the jurisdiction may be punished by withholding the acceptance of responsibility credit." But this sure sounds like sour reversal grapes on the part of the district court.
Bliss's recalculated Guidelines range was 262-327 months -- even higher than his original Guidelines range. (He might have been thinking -- "This appeal was a great idea!"). The district court, however, imposed the same sentence of 264 months imprisonment.