High court says old case not subject to newer sentences

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court said Monday that judges can't use newer sentencing guidelines on an old case.

The justices ruled 5-4 for Marvin Peugh, who was convicted of five counts of bank fraud, sentenced to 70 months' imprisonment and ordered to pay nearly $2 million in Illinois for check-kiting and fraudulently obtaining a business loan.

Peugh says his sentencing was unfair because 2009 sentencing guidelines were used instead of the more lenient 1999 ones in effect when he committed the felonies.

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld his sentencing because the guidelines used by judges are only advisory in nature.

The high court, in an opinion written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, overturned that decision and sent the case back.

Also Monday, the Supreme Court rejected an appeal from two American whistle-blowers who claim U.S. forces tortured them in Iraq and who want to sue former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld.

The justices' action leaves in place a federal appeals court ruling that found Rumsfeld cannot be held liable for actions taken by subordinates that may have crossed legal bounds.

The two men are Donald Vance and Nathan Ertel, who say they were detained and tortured after they accused an Iraqi-owned company for which they worked of illegally running guns. They argued Rumsfeld personally approved interrogation methods for use by the U.S. military in Iraq, making him responsible for what happened to them during several weeks they were held in military camps.