United States v. Mark Hebert

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that defendant’s Fifth and Sixth Amendment claims were foreclosed by precedent because courts can engage in judicial factfinding at sentencing where the sen- tence does not exceed the statutory maximum term
• holding that a variance from 6–7 years to 92 years was substantively reasonable
• noting that Fifth Amendment challenges to the preponderance standard at sentencing “are foreclosed by our precedent . . . because we have held that courts can engage in judicial factfinding where the defendant’s sentence ultimately falls within the statutory maximum term”
• affirming a 92-year sentence where the top of the guidelines range was six to seven years
• affirming upward variance to 92 years from a guidelines sentence of “six to seven years”
• upholding a variance of 1214% from the high end of the Guidelines range

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).