The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals at Chicago ruled that a federal judge’s comments about “people like you” were not inflammatory enough to warrant resentencing of a man who had pleaded guilty to unlawful gun possession by a felon. The appeals court found that U.S. District Judge John F. Kness of the Northern District of Illinois “walked a fine line” with his remarks, but they did not constitute reversible error.
The case involved Elvin Saldana-Gonzalez, who received an above-guidelines sentence of 78 months in prison in February 2022, surpassing the government’s recommended 46-month sentence. Saldana-Gonzalez argued that he possessed the firearm for self-protection after his release from prison for the murder of a rival gang member and the injury of another individual. He also cited a troubled childhood as a mitigating factor.
According to the 7th Circuit, Judge Kness made the following “brief troublesome remarks” during the sentencing hearing: “When I look at your criminal history, your criminal history is entirely firearm-centric. And if you didn’t feel compelled not to go around with a gun—I don’t care how much danger you feel you were in; I feel in danger every single day when I drive on the expressway. I do. And I’m sorry, sir, it’s because of people like you. It really is. It’s because of people like you who have absolutely no respect for the law.”
The gun possession charge stemmed from a traffic stop that occurred a year and a half after Saldana-Gonzalez’s release from prison. During the stop, he fled from the vehicle while carrying a loaded gun, which he later discarded into a dumpster.
In his defense, Saldana-Gonzalez’s lawyers presented evidence of his troubled upbringing in Puerto Rico. Having been initially raised by a blind mother, he was placed in foster care at the age of 5, where he experienced abuse. He later returned to live with his mother but was involved in a car accident at age 10, resulting in the loss of his childhood memories. Subsequently, he moved to Milwaukee to live with an alcoholic uncle who neglected him. Later, he relocated to Chicago to live with his uncle’s friend and became involved in a street gang. At the age of 19, he committed the murder for which he had been previously incarcerated.
While the 7th Circuit acknowledged that Judge Kness’s comments were questionable, the court concluded that they did not cross the line into extraneous and inflammatory territory. The appeals court emphasized that individual defendants should not be scapegoats for a judge’s frustrations with societal issues. The 7th Circuit recognized that Judge Kness had carefully considered Saldana-Gonzalez’s upbringing and personal history, and acknowledged that he had not been dealt a favorable hand in life. However, Judge Kness also emphasized the need to protect the public from potential future crimes committed by Saldana-Gonzalez.
The 7th Circuit’s decision highlighted the broader issue of gun violence in Chicago and the court’s concern regarding the level of violence in the city. While the court recognized that there is a debate about the effectiveness of general deterrence, Judge Kness expressed his hope that his sentencing message would have a deterrent effect on others and contribute to the protection of the public.
The 7th Circuit’s ruling upheld the federal judge’s comments about “people like you,” stating that they did not warrant a sentence reversal for Elvin Saldana-Gonzalez. The decision shed light on the delicate balance that judges must strike when making remarks during sentencing proceedings and emphasized the importance of avoiding extraneous and inflammatory statements.
Don’t be a silent ninja! Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.