Two different victims are car-jacked. One is driving a Ford worth $5,000, the other is driving a Mercedes worth $60,000. Neither car is damaged during the crime. If the cases and defendants are otherwise identical, should the defendant whose victim drove a more expensive car get a longer sentence? In the Third Circuit, the answer now is “yes.”
The case is United States v. Smith. Opinion by Jordan, joined by Rendell and Chagares. The opinion was issued without oral argument just 12 days after its panel date.
What Smith actually held is that the USSG 2B3.1 sentence enhancement for property “taken, damaged, or destroyed” applies to undamaged car-jacked cars. And that enhancement goes up one level for property worth over $10,000 and two levels for property worth over $50,000.
The upshot? Our Ford carjacker might get a prison sentence of 41 to 51 months. Our otherwise identical Mercedes carjacker gets 57 to 71 months. Because the victim was driving a nicer car, the prison sentence is 40% longer.
I don’t see how this result is any different from one where a kidnapper gets a longer sentence because his victim was wearing a Rolex instead of a Timex. A head-scratcher.
Update: no rehearing petition filed, mandate issued.
Just further proof how “unjust” justice can be and how the rich get better justice.