United States v. Blaine Handerhan

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that when we examine rulings on downward departure motions, we have the “ability to ‘infer meaning from the District Court’s actions’”
• finding that the District Court did not commit procedural error in sentencing despite not discussing in detail all seven § 3553 factors
• explaining that “[t]he admonition against ambiguous rulings on downward departure requests is not ironclad”
• affirming a sentence as substantively reasonable where the defendant contended the 24-month downward variance he received at sentencing was insufficient due to the district court’s alleged failure to correctly weigh mitigating factors
• “If the sentence is within the applicable Guidelines range, we may presume that the sentence is reasonable.”
• “If the sentence is within the applicable Guidelines range, we may presume that the sentence is reasonable.” (citing Rita, 551 U.S. at 350–51)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).