United States v. Carl Bennett

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that an objection to the probation officer’s use of non-Shepard materials in preparation of the PSI did not amount to a dispute of the facts
• holding that a defendant admits the facts in the presentence investigation report if he does not object to them
• holding that “the district court did not err in relying on the undisputed facts in Bennett’s PSI to determine that his prior convictions were violent felonies under 11 Case: 11-13557 Date Filed: 11/21/2012 Page: 12 of 23 the ACCA”
• holding that “the district court did not err in relying on the undisputed facts in Bennett’s PSI to determine that his prior convictions were violent felonies under 11 Case: 11-13557 Date Filed: 11/21/2012 Page: 12 of 23 the ACCA”
• stating that “challenges to the facts contained in the PSI must be asserted with specificity and clarity ...' [or] the objection is waived” (internal citations omitted)
• explaining that the failure to object to factual allegations in a presentence investigation report admits those facts for sentencing purposes

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).