United States v. Dorvee

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that photos were \intended to entice a minor\ because they \were sent as part of a grooming process\ (internal quotation marks omitted)
• concluding that photos were “intended to entice a minor” because they “were sent as part of a grooming process” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• holding that deference to the Guidelines depends on the thoroughness of the Commission’s analysis and the validity of its reasoning
• holding that a statutory maximum sentence of 240-months imprisonment was substantively unreasonable
• noting that we are empowered to address “both the procedural and substantive reasonableness of [a] sentence in the course of an appeal where we find both types of error”
• noting that “substantive reasonableness review is not an opportunity for ‘tinkering’ with sentences we disagree with, and that we place ‘great trust’ in sentencing courts”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).