United States v. Gary R. George

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court erred in failing to consider the Guidelines, but that the error was harmless
• holding that the scope of the scheme is defined by “the plea agreement, the plea colloquy, and other statements made by the parties” when a conviction follows a plea agreement rather than a jury trial
• stating that “[i]t is hard to conceive of below‐range sentences that would be unreasonably high”
• remanding with instructions for the district court to receive written submissions from the parties to establish the victim’s loss amount
• stating that: “Judges need not rehearse on the record all of the considerations that 18 U.S.C. 3553(a) lists; it is enough to calculate the range accurately and explain why . . . the defendant deserves more or less.”
• analogizing the current sentencing landscape to sentencing after supervised-release violations for which the guidelines have always been advisory and mandating the same approach, post-Booker, for the guidelines as a whole

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).