032242P.pdf   07/25/2005  United States  v.  Peter C. Wingate
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  03-2242
   District of Minnesota   
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with Benton, Circuit Judge, and 
   Hovland, District Judge] 
   Criminal case - Sentencing Guidelines. For the court's earlier opinion 
   in the case, see U.S. v. Wingate, 369 F.3d 1028 (8th Cir. 2004). On 
   remand from the Supreme Court for further consideration in light of 
   Booker, the court applies Pirani's plain error analysis, and concludes 
   defendant is not entitled to Booker relief as the record does not 
   demonstrate a reasonable probability that the district court would have 
   imposed a lesser sentence under an advisory guidelines scheme.; sentence 
   was not unreasonable under the factors set out in 18 U.S.C. Sec. 3553(a). 
  
032242P.pdf   06/02/2004  United States  v.  Peter C. Wingate
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  03-2242
   District of Minnesota   
   Criminal case - Sentencing Guidelines. Violent Crime Control and Law 
   Enforcement Act of 1994 did not prohibit the enhancement of sentences 
   of those persons age 18 to 20, and the Sentencing Commission did not 
   exceed its authority in adopting Section 34B1.4, which provides that an 
   enhancement may be imposed if a person 18 or older uses a person under 
   the age of 18 to commit the offense; record supported the finding 
   defendant used two minors to assist in the commission of the offense, and 
   the district court did not err in imposing the enhancement. 
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with R. Arnold, Circuit Judge and 
   Hovland, District Judge]