The following excerpt is from United States v. Weingarten, Docket No. 11-3999-cr (2nd Cir. 2013):
discussed in United States v. Gelb, 944 F.2d 52, 60 (2d Cir. 1991), where we noted that we would question "a judge who had determined that a particular offense merited slight punishment," then "revised that punishment to compensate for the disallowance of a penalty imposed for wrongdoing of a different sort." The district court here explicitly stated that it based Weingarten's original sentence "on what the defendant did - not the particular configuration of counts."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.