United States v. Kapordelis

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that an error in the guideline calculations was harmless where the record indicated that the district court would have imposed the same sentence absent the error
• holding that a guidelines error was harmless where the district court, by varying upward to statutory maximum, indicated its intention to give the defendant the greatest sentence that it could
• holding that any double counting error was harmless since the record indicated that the court would have imposed the same upward variance regardless of any Guidelines discrepancy due to the defendant’s “long history of abuse, parity, and the need for incapacitation”
• holding that departures and variances are different mechanisms resting on different rationales
• holding that any double counting error was harmless since the record indicated that the court would have imposed the same upward variance regardless of any Guidelines discrepancy due to the defendant’s “long history of abuse, parity, and the need for incapacitation”
• explaining that, though the court “com- mented on” a factor the defendant argued was impermissible, the court did not base its decision on that ground

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).