· 8/4/2006
United States v. Charles E. Winston
Citations
- 456 F.3d 861
- 2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 19828
- 2006 WL 2192656
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that a district court “must explain its reasoning for imposing a concurrent or consecutive sentence”
- affirming the district court’s consecutive sentence because it conducted a similar discussion
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Smith, Heaney, Gruender
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.