United States v. MacIel-vasquez

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that a sentencing court is not required to state why it chose a particular sentence rather than other potential sentences
• concluding that we are bound to follow Almendarez- Torres until the Supreme Court expressly overrules it
• “[W]e reject Maciel’s argument that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is unconstitutional.”
• “[W]e reject Maciel’s argument that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is unconstitutional.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named United States v. MacIel-vasquez

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

• United States v. MacIel-vasquez
  Ninth Circuit· 2006-08-15