United States v. Christopher R. Luersen

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 case was not an “unforeseeable judicial interpretation of the sentencing guidelines” because it was “derived from the guidelines themselves”
• rejecting an argument that an application of the career offender provisions of the Sentencing Guidelines was “unforeseeable,” “unexpected” and “indefensible”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).