United States v. Mark Zabielski

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that \a bare arrest record—without more— does not justify an assumption that a defendant has committed other crimes\ (quoting Berry, 553 F.3d at 284
• noting that “improperly calculating the Guidelines range” is a “significant procedural error” (citing United States v. Tomko, 562 F.3d 558, 567 (3d Cir. 2009) (en banc))
• noting that “improperly calculating the Guidelines range” is a “significant procedural error” (citing United States v. Tomko, 562 F.3d 558, 567 (3d Cir. 2009) (en banc))
• declining to disturb a sentence based on the district court’s stray comments during a sentencing hearing
• declining to find Tapia violation where statements regarding rehabilitation did \not show that the District Court imposed a longer sentence to ensure that [defendant] received the treatment that he needed\
• holding error was harmless on these grounds

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).