United States v. Johnny Gunter

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that, at Gunter's first and second step, our pre- Booker case law is still to be considered, given its advisory force.
• noting that, at Gunter's first and second step, our pr e-Booker case law is still to be considered, given its advisory force.
• noting that, at Gunter’s first and second step, our pre-Booker case law is still to be considered, given its advisory force.
• explaining that a court cannot “reject the [Guidelines’] 100:1 [crack to powder] ratio and substitute its own”
• stating that post-Booker, “district courts may fact-find to increase sentences beyond the Guidelines range provided they are within the statutory minimum and maximum dictated by the United States Code”
• noting that at step two, our pre-Booker case law continues to have advisory force

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).