United States v. Eric Lloyd A/K/A Calvin Larue A/K/A Butter Eric Floyd

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that the Third Circuit “essentially agree[s]” with the holding in Worley but that in “unusual” circumstances, a district court could properly take into account post-sentencing rehabilitative efforts
• finding that in the case under consideration the court was “unaware of any circumstance that could satisfy the exacting standard that we have set to justify a court in considering post- sentencing rehabilitation efforts following a Booker resentencing”
• finding no error in court’s consideration of § 3553 factors and concluding analysis
• “Nevertheless, insofar as [the defendant] is advancing contentions that he did not preserve in the district court, our review is confined by the exacting plain error standards.”
• “Nevertheless, insofar as [the defendant] is advancing contentions that he did not preserve in the district court, our review is confined by the exacting plain error standards.”
• “Nevertheless, insofar as [the defendant] is advancing contentions that he did not preserve in the district court, our review is confined by the exacting plain error standards.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).