United States v. Coles, Terence

How courts have described this case

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

• noting the “slightly different approaches” taken by the Seventh and Second Circuits to post-Booker limited remands and adopting the Seventh Circuit’s approach
• applying plain error standard and remanding record for district court to determine whether “there would have been a materially different result, more favorable to the defendant, had the sentence been imposed in accordance with the post-Booker sentencing regime”
• the district court’s application of “the Guidelines on the assumption that they were mandatory ... was [an] error.”
• “the error under Booker ‘is the mandatory use of the Guidelines enhancement, not the fact of the enhancement’ ”
• “We note that the ‘limited remand’ procedures adopted by the Second and Seventh Circuits offer slightly different 6362 UNITED STATES v. AMELINE approaches.”
• \[I]t is a miscarriage of justice to give a person an illegal sentence that increases his punishment ....\ (quoting United States v. Paladino , 401 F.3d 471 , 483 (7th Cir. 2005) ).

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).