United States v. Bert Douglas Montgomery

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 district court must obtain, or at least solicit, the views of counsel in writing before deciding whether re-sentencing is appropriate”
• referring repeat- edly to Crosby and other Second Circuit precedent in determining that Ameline requires submission of written state- ments by counsel
• explaining “the term ‘should’ often connotes a strong suggestion, not a requirement,” 1 and that its precise statutory meaning “depends on the context in which the words are found”
• “Failure to follow this court’s instructions on remand is grounds for the case to be re-remanded for compliance with our instructions.” (citations omitted)
• restating explicitly what Ameline requires through references to Crosby
• defining “must” as being “primarily of mandatory effect”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).