United States v. Jose Jorge Anaya Castro

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that, when the explicit language of a statute or rule does not specif- ically resolve an issue, there can be no plain error if there is no prec- edent from the Supreme Court or this Court directly resolving it
• stating to establish plain error, a defendant must show that there was an (1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) that affects substantial rights
• finding “[w]hen Congress directed the Sentencing Commission to allow the departure for only participating districts . . . [it] implicitly determined that the disparity was warranted”
• stating that, when the explicit language of a statute or rule does not specifically resolve an issue, there can be no plain error where there 2 Case: 12-13015 Date Filed: 02/13/2013 Page: 3 of 6 is no precedent from the Supreme Court or this Court directly resolving it
• “When the explicit language of a statute or rule does not specifically resolve an issue, there can be no plain error where there is no precedent from the Supreme Court or this Court directly resolving it.” (internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).