United States v. Haj-Hamed

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that “[i]n general, a district court 6 No. 22-3288, United States v. Jackson can consider uncharged or dismissed conduct for sentencing purposes” if the court finds that the conduct is supported “by a preponderance of the evidence”
• upholding determination that family circumstances were not so extraordinary as to justify departure or variance, and distinguishing Husein on this basis
• listing failure to adequately explain a chosen sentence as a procedural error
• “It is correct that, post-Booker, a district court may vary a sentence to account for a factor discouraged by the Sentencing Commission.” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “[A]n appellate court should generally defer to the ‘special competence’ of the district court in determining whether family circumstances are so extraordinary as to justify a departure or a variance from a Guidelines sentence.”
• “an appellate court should generally defer to the special competence of the district court in determining whether family circumstances are so extraordinary as to justify a departure or a variance from a Guidelines sentence.” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).