United States v. Kenneth James Lundien

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that court cannot reimpose sentence once defendant has fully served a lawful sentence for his crimes
• noting that an enhanced sentence prompted by a court’s vindictive or other improper motive would be “fundamentally unfair” and “deny the defendant due process”
• noting that a sen- tence enhanced \because of the vindictiveness or other plainly improper motive of the trial court would be fundamentally unfair and would deny the defendant due process\
• recognizing the general rule “that a trial court has the power to recall a defendant who had already been sentenced and to impose a sentence different from that originally imposed”
• implying that jeopardy attaches when sentence “fully served”
• opining that \due process may also be denied when [even a statutorily invalid] sentence is enhanced after the defendant has served so much of his sentence that his expectations as to its finality have crystallized and it would be fundamentally unfair to defeat them\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).