United States v. Dazey

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that fourth prong is met, in part, because “Mr. Dazey vigorously contested the judge-found facts that enhanced his sentence.”
• holding that contesting the evidentiary bases for judge-found facts is not sufficient to preserve Booker error
• holding that a defendant’s challenge to the factual basis of Guideline enhancements during sentencing weighed in favor of exercising discretion to remand
• holding that while the defendant may have believed promises that turned out to be false, jury was entitled to conclude otherwise in light of “undeniable implausibility of these representations”
• noting that the acquittal of codefendants on some charges showed that the jury had separately considered each defendant
• stating that we conduct plain-error review “less rigidly when reviewing a potential constitutional error” (internal citation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).