United States v. Marmolejo

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that the mandate rule “serves both justice as well as judicial economy [by] requir[ing] a defendant to raise all relevant and appealable issues at the original sentencing”
• refusing to require a de novo resentencing hearing in which the district court could (re)consider every legal and factual ground for the sentence
• “The only issues on remand properly before the district court are those issues arising out of the correction of the sentence ordered by this court.”
• “This court specifically rejects the proposition that all resentenc-ing hearings following a remand are to be conducted de novo unless expressly limited by the court in its order of remand.”
• “All other issues not arising out of this court’s ruling and not raised before the appeals court, which could have been brought in the original appeal, are not proper for reconsideration by the district court below.”
• “[T]he resentencing court can consider whatever this court directs—no more, no less.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).