Peugh v. United States

Oral argument

• Argued

  60 min recording
  Listen

Source: CourtListener oral-argument corpus (CC0).

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that retroactive application of advisory sentencing guidelines violated Ex Post Facto Clause because guidelines created sufficient risk of increased sentencing range
• holding that using a higher Guidelines range at sentencing than was authorized for the offense at the time of its commission violates the Ex Post Facto Clause
• holding that the Ex Post Facto Clause is violated only if the defendant receives a “higher applicable sentencing range”
• holding that to sentence an offender under guidelines not in effect at the time of the offense violates the Ex Post Facto Clause
• holding that “retrospective application of a higher Guidelines range violates the Ex Post Facto Clause.”
• holding that Guidelines imposed ex post facto that create a significant risk of a higher sentence “offend[] . . . fundamental justice”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).