United States v. Joseph D. Comstock

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that substantial rights were affected where defendant would serve 17 months less if the error had not occurred
• recognizing that substantial rights were “clearly affected” where defendant would serve seventeen months less if the error had not occurred
• finding plain error standard met where incorrect version of Guidelines was applied and ex post facto violation resulted
• finding plain error standard met where incorrect version of Guidelines was applied and ex post facto violation resulted
• reversing under plain error standard when a defendant's sentence was erroneously lengthened by 17 months
• reversing because 17-month sentencing error seriously affected fairness of sentencing proceedings

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).