David Delce v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that under application note 4(F), which provides for an obstruction-of-justice enhancement when an offender provides materially false information to a judge or magistrate judge, an enhanced sentence \[is] appropriate whether or not a significant hindrance occurred\
• noting that under application note 4(F), which provides for an obstruction-of-justice enhancement when an offender provides materially false information to a judge or magistrate judge, an enhanced sentence “[is] appropriate whether or not a significant hindrance occurred”
• holding an error in 7 Case: 17-12645 Date Filed: 10/24/2019 Page: 8 of 10 calculating the defendant’s sentence as to one count was harmless where a longer, concurrent sentence stood as to another count
• noting that under application note 4(F), which provides for an obstruction-of-justice enhancement when an offender provides materially false information to a judge or magistrate judge, an enhanced sentence “[is] appropriate whether or not a significant hindrance occurred”
• remanding for resentencing because we were uncertain whether the sentence would have been the same absent the error
• construing the district court's decision to require the government to give race-neutral explanations for its peremptory challenges as an implicit decision that Batson step 1 was met

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).