United States v. Lanning

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that a defendant’s “criminal history” and “likelihood of reoffending” can form the basis for an upward variance
• finding that a defendant’s history of theft justified an upward variance for a theft sentence because the defendant “essentially made his living as a thief”
• noting that “criminal history and likelihood of reoffending . . . may properly be taken into account in the court’s decision to impose an upward variance under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a)”
• finding that serious criminal history warranted 42-month sentence, which was “well above [the defendant’s] advisory Guidelines range of 18 to 24 months, though considerably below the statutory maximum sentence of 60 months”
• finding that the district court did not err in considering criminal history at sentencing after raising the defendant’s criminal history score because the sentencing judge considered a range of § 3553(a) factors
• treating the question of whether the district court correctly imposed an upward departure as a substantive issue

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).