Matter of Benitez v. Annucci

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a defendant’s substantial rights are affected if he can show “the application of an incorrect, higher Guidelines range and the sentence he received thereunder”
• exercising discretion despite particular facts weighing against it because of the 36-month disparity between a sentence at the bottom of the incorrect range and a sentence at the bottom of the correct range
• “Further, we have declined to exercise our discretion to notice sentencing errors under the fourth prong when these types of facts are involved—e.g., recidivistic behavior.” (emphasis in original)
• vacating and remanding because error resulted in thirty-six-month disparity
• 36-month disparity between applied and proper Guidelines ranges; remanded

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).