United States v. Gary Lynn Moeller

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 holding in Anzalone “was predicated on government concessions that established a statutory duty to file the substantial assistance motion”
• stating that the holding in Anzalone “was predicated on government concessions that established a statutory duty to file the substantial assistance motion”
• noting that a substantive due process violation involves government conduct that shocks the conscience and an equal protection violation requires unlawful and purposeful discrimination
• finding no unconstitutional motive when “the prosecutor explicitly stated that the government’s decision not to file a § 3553(e) motion was based upon the cooperation [the defendant] provided” and nothing in the record contradicted that claim (quotation and alteration omitted
• “Our subsequent cases have made it clear, however, that relief in Anzalone was predicated on government concessions that established a statutory duty to file the substantial assistance motion.”
• “[S]o long as the government is exercising the statutory power conferred by [law] and its action is not based on an unconstitutional motive, its refusal to file the motion is unreviewable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).