United States v. Mamdouh Mahmud Salim

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that while “a criminal defendant has the right to be present during sentencing” under “both the Constitution[’s] [Fifth Amendment Due Process Clause] and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 43(a)(3
• explaining that “[w]e have never held that a district court is required to reject an applicable Guideline,” and recognizing that a “judge may give a non- Guidelines sentence where []he disagrees with the weight the Guidelines assign to a factor”
• reviewing a district court’s acceptance of waiver of presence for plain error
• “the government has not satisfied its burden of proving that [the defendant] waived his right to be present”
• “While the district court did not directly reject Salim’s argument . . . we have never required judges to [do so].”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).