United States v. Leroy Lockhart, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that proportionality review “is not appropriate” for any such sentence
• declining to remand despite a Rule 32 violation where the defendant “failed to show that the error would have affected his sentence”
• declining to remand, despite a Rule 32 violation, where the defendant “failed to show that the error would have affected his sentence”
• declining to remand, despite a Rule 32 violation, where the defendant “failed to show that the error would have affected his sentence”
• applying plain error analysis to hold that when defendant pointed to no portion of the PSR that he would have challenged had the district court conducted an express inquiry, he did not show prejudice and vacatur and remand were not warranted

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).