041514P.pdf   08/02/2005  United States  v.  Marcus St. James
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  04-1514
   District of Minnesota   
   [PUBLISHED] [Riley, Author, with M. Arnold and Beam, Circuit 
   Judges] 
   Criminal case - Criminal law. District court did not err in finding 
   defendant's absence from trial was voluntary, and it appropriately 
   balanced public interest, as well as the interests of the jurors, parties and 
   court, in deciding to proceed with trial in defendant's absence; district 
   court did not err in imposing an enhancement for obstruction of justice 
   based on defendant's absence; nor did not court err in imposing an 
   enhancement for reckless endangerment based on defendant's actions 
   during his absence; applying Pirani's plain error analysis, defendant was 
   not entitled to Booker relief as he failed to demonstrate a reasonable 
   probability that the district court would have imposed a lesser sentence 
   under an advisory guidelines scheme.