Blocker v. Blocker

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that “a unitary abuse of discretion standard” applies when considering each prong of the four-part test (quoting Alapizco- Valenzuela, 546 F.3d at 1215)
• explaining that a U.S.S.G. § 5K2.3 departure based on a finding that the offense caused extreme psychological injury “subsumed the predicate finding” that the injury exceeded “the ‘normal’ injury” resulting from such an offense
• rejecting defendant’s challenge on plain-error review where defendant “fail[ed] to advance any argument as to how this error affected his sentence, and thus utterly fails to carry his burden”
• “The extended nature of [the defendant’s] pernicious behavior leaves no doubt that this was no ‘routine’ aggravated sexual assault.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).