DOJ-OGR-00021036.pdf

Case 22-1426, Document 58, 02/28/2023, 3475901, Page210 of 221 A-410 M6SQmax1 35 1 said, I don't need repetition of the arguments in the papers, 2 but if there is any additional points you want to make, you're 3 welcome to. 4 MR. EVERDELL: Your Honor, just one point. I will be 5 brief. The government in its papers makes the argument that 6 the background commentary can't be relied upon as authoritative 7 because it is not explanatory or interpretative of what the 8 guideline is. I think that is incorrect. 9 It is not simply a recitation of what Congress was 10 considering. That first sentence or two which talks about how 11 this guideline can only be applied to offenders who represent a 12 continuing danger to the community is interpretative of what 13 the guideline is. The title of the guideline is repeat and 14 dangerous sex offenders. That explanatory commentary explains 15 how to interpret what dangerous means. It means someone who is 16 continuously dangerous to the community, not someone who's 17 never been accused of a crime in the 18 plus years since the 18 crime in this case, and has never been accused of re-offending. 19 So I don't agree with that point. This is authoritative 20 guidance from the Sentencing Commission, and the Court should 21 consider it as such. Thank you. 22 THE COURT: Ms. Moe, do you want to respond? 23 MS. MOE: No, your Honor. We rest on our briefing on 24 this issue, but thank you. 25 THE COURT: Thank you. Anything else? SOUTHERN DISTRICT REPORTERS, P.C. (212) 805-0300 DOJ-OGR-00021036