Eighth Circuit· 9/27/2010

United States v. Burrell

Citations

622 F.3d 961
2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 19935
2010 WL 3732097

How courts have described this case

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

stating that we review a district court’s decision not to reduce a sentence under § '3582(c)(2) for an abuse of discretion
holding, in same circumstances, that defendant lacked opportunity contemporaneously to object to district court’s ruling, and that defendant was not required to move for reconsideration to preserve error for appellate review
remanding for explanation where no proportionality between original sentence at middle of advisory guideline range and amended sentence at very top of amended guideline range
applying the same standard as initial sentencing decisions (citing Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 50, 128 S.Ct. 586, 169 L.Ed.2d 445 (2007))
remanding because we could not determine how the district court exercised its discretion in choosing not to amend the defendant’s sentence further
“Our cases applying Clark uniformly have involved proportionality between the initial sentence and the amended sentence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Loken, Gruender, Benton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

25 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named United States v. Burrell

16 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.