United States of America, Plaintiff-Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Nancy Ruth Iversen, Defendant-Appellant/cross-Appellee

How courts have described this case

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

• holding because the district court did not make a finding of perjury an enhancement for obstruction was not required
• finding right of allocution satisfied although the district court extended the invitation to speak only to “the defense.”
• dismissing ineffective assistance claim without prejudice to defendant's right to bring motion for relief under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
• finding right of allocution satisfied although the district court extended the invitation to speak only to \the defense.\
• noting the district court did not have authority under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b) to credit the petitioner for time spent in home detention during a previous sentence, and such a claim should first be presented to the Bureau of Prisons
• noting the district court did not have authority under 18 U.S.C. § 3585(b) to credit the defendant for time spent in home detention during -6- a previous sentence, and such a claim should first be presented to the Bureau of Prisons

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).