United States v. Irey

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a district court abuses its discre- tion when it “gives significant weight to an improper or irrelevant factor”
• holding that a downward variance of 12.5 years, or 42% was a major variance
• conceding that our en banc decision in “Irey articulated meaningful lower and upper limits on a court’s sentencing discretion,”
• explaining that the “primary purpose” of the Sentencing Reform Act “was to channel district courts’ sentencing discretion and reduce disparity in sentencing”
• explaining that a case is outside the heartland “if there was something unusual, either about the defendant or the circumstances surrounding the crime, that warranted a different sentence”
• explaining that a case is outside the heartland “if there was something unusual, either about the defendant or the circumstances surrounding the crime, that warranted a different sentence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named United States v. Irey

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• United States v. Irey
  Eleventh Circuit· 2009-03-30· cited 9×
• United States v. Irey
  Eleventh Circuit· 2009-03-30· cited 4×
• United States v. Irey
  Eleventh Circuit· 2009-08-12
• United States v. Irey
  M.D. Florida· 2010-10-22