United States v. Ibarra-Luna

How courts have described this case

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

• holding procedural Guideline error was not harmless where inter alia the sentence imposed was exactly double the Guideline maximum and triple the Guideline minimum
• explaining that although the record indicated the district court would have imposed an above-guidelines sentence even in light of the correct range, it had not been established with \requisite certainty” that the court \would have imposed precisely the same sentence” but for the error
• “The government concedes that a mere offer to sell, without evidence of possession or transfer, is tantamount to solicitation and is not proscribed by the [CSA].”
• a court must “clearly articulate” its reasons for departing from the Guidelines, including “why the range would not serve the goals listed in [18 U.S.C.] Section 3653(a)”
• a court must “clearly articulate” its reasons for departing from the Guidelines, including “why the range would not serve the goals listed in [18 U.S.C.] Section 3553(a)”
• discussing importance of the record in abuse-of-discretion review

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).