United States v. Kirchhof

How courts have described this case

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

• finding “[njone of the other factors to which Kirchhof directs the court are so compelling as to necessitate a shorter sentence”
• finding “[n]one of the other factors to which Kirchhof directs the court are so compelling as to necessitate a shorter sentence”
• reversing a variance in part because the defendant’s “lack of prior criminal history was already taken into account in calculating his guidelines range”
• explaining, in the context of an exemplary personal record, that a “lack of prior criminal history was already taken into account in calculating [defendant’s] guidelines range”
• rejecting facial challenge to reasonableness of recommended guideline range for child pornography cases
• court took steps to avoid an unwarranted disparity by considering the Guidelines and specific sentencing factors before sentencing petitioner below the advisory guideline range

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).