United States v. Luis Angel Torres-Otero, A/K/A El Enamo, A/K/A Little Luis, A/K/A Primo, Luis A. Torres-Otero v. United States

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that district courts are traditionally afforded broad leeway in the exercise of its section 2255 authority
• remedying situation by vacating judgment only to reimpose the same sentence and allow defendant to file appeal within appropriate time period from date of reimposed sentence
• “[I]n cases where a defendant fails to rebut factual assertions in a PSR, the district court is justified in relying on those assertions”
• defendant failed to file appeal because district court failed to inform him of right to appeal
• “[A]bsent exceptional circumstances, we generally will not consider arguments raised for the first 28 time on appeal . . . .”
• “[I]n cases were the sentence (but not the conviction) is infirm, only the ‘resentencfing]’, or ‘correcting] the sentence’ options are open to the district court, since a prisoner should never be ‘discharge[d]’ or ‘grant[ed] a new trial’ based solely on á defective sentence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).