United States v. Kevin R. Hamm

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that resen-tencing was required under Booker where defendant was sentenced at the low end of the applicable Guidelines range
• stating that even if the district court might have opted not to depart from the recommendations of the Sentencing Guidelines, the fact that it did not have the opportunity to do so affected the defendant’s substantial rights
• finding plain error although defendant’s sentence was based upon facts admitted in his guilty plea “[g]iven that the Supreme Court has held that the Guidelines are now discretionary”
• sentence at low end of guideline range, combined with district court’s expressed sympathy for defendant, indicate likelihood that district court may have sentenced defendant to a lower sentence under an advisory scheme
• when faced by an “apparent intracircuit split,” the earlier-decided decision controls

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).