United States v. Adan Gutierrez-Mendez

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that neither “[s]elf-serving statements” nor “mere objections to the PSR” are “competent rebuttal evidence”
• finding any error harmless where the district court stated it would impose the same sentence even if it were mistaken in its calculation of the Guidelines range
• District court statement that it would have given the defendant the same sentence even if it was mistaken in its application of the guidelines renders any error harmless.
• “The government has the burden of establishing harmlessness beyond a reasonable doubt.”
• noting reasonable foreseeability constitutes factual finding reviewed for clear error
• mere objections to a PSR are not competent rebuttal evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).