UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Francisco REAL-HERNANDEZ, Defendant-Appellant

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 debriefing session from an earlier incident constituted an adequate proffer
• holding that a debriefing session from an ear- lier incident constituted an adequate proffer
• determining that \meaningful appellate review\ not permitted when district court failed to provide reasons for refusing to apply safety valve provision
• explaining that there is “no general right to an evidentiary hearing at sentencing” and that the decision whether to conduct an evidentiary hearing is “discretionary, not mandatory”
• explaining that the defendant must “truthfully supply details of his own culpability”
• citing, respectively, United States v. Kimball, 975 F.2d 563, 568 (9th Cir.1992) and United States v. Montoya, 45 F.3d 1286, 1291 (9th Cir. 1995)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).