United States v. Jack Brent Crace

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that no “magic words” are required to demonstrate that a district court considered substance abuse treatment
• explaining that a “defendant’s positive drug test combined with his admission of use of a controlled substance mandates a finding that the defendant possessed drugs”
• stating that the § 3583(d) exception to mandatory revocation \restore[s] discretion to the district judge\ to decide whether to revoke supervised release
• stating that § 3583(d) “restore[s] discretion to the district judge” where a defendant is otherwise subject to mandatory imprisonment under § 3583(g) for failing a drug test
• explaining that consideration of a recidivism enhancement in grading a violation is not improper double counting because the “single [prior] act is relevant to two dimensions of the sentencing guidelines analysis”
• applying similar reasoning to find that simple possession supported a Grade B violation where the defendant’s criminal history resulted in a higher maximum sentence due to the defendant’s prior drug offense

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).