Contrasting circuit approaches to GVRs

As detailed here and here and here, there have been more than 500 Booker-inspired GVRs in which the Supreme Court sent sentencing appeals back to the circuit courts.  Today, in brief decisions from the Sixth and Eleventh Circuits, we see another example of contrasting circuit justice in the handling of these GVRed cases. 

The Sixth Circuit in US v. Loverson, No. 03-6120 (6th Cir. Mar. 3, 2005) (available here), simply explains, “[u]pon reconsideration, we conclude that the district court’s sentencing order must be vacated and the case remanded for re-sentencing.”  In contrast, in US v. Dockery, No. 03-1638 (11th Cir. Mar. 3, 2005) (available here), the Eleventh Circuit relies on post-Apprendi circuit precedent and the fact that, in his initial brief, “Appelllant asserted no such Apprendi (or its progeny) challenge to his sentence” in order to “reinstate our previous opinion in this case and affirm, once again, Appellant’s sentence after our reconsideration in light of Booker, pursuant to the Supreme Court’s mandate.”