United States v. Amezcua-Vasquez

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 downward variance was required where the underlying convictions occurred twenty-five years prior to the defendant's removal and reentry
• holding that a downward variance was required where the underlying convictions occurred twenty-five years prior to the defendant’s removal and reentry
• noting that the scope of the decision is “limited” given the “specific set of facts presented by this case”
• stating that reasonableness of sentence within the enhanced Guidelines range is to be determined in light of the section 3553(a) factors
• holding a fifty-six-month sentence for illegal reentry substantively unreasonable because a sixteen-level enhancement applied to “a decades-old prior conviction” without any adjustment for the magnitude of its staleness
• holding a fifty-six-month sentence for illegal reentry substantively unreasonable because a sixteen-level enhancement applied to “a decades-old prior conviction” without any adjustment for the magnitude of its staleness

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).