United States v. Martin

How courts have described this case

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

• acknowledging that sentencing courts possess “cumulative experience garnered through the sheer number of district court sentencing proceedings that take place day by day”
• explaining that the mere \fact that a sentencing court possesses the raw power to deviate from the guidelines does not mean that it can (or should) do so casually\
• noting that even after Gall “a certain ‘sliding scale’ effect lurks in the penumbra of modern federal sentencing law.”
• explaining that a “plausible sentencing rationale and a defensible result” form the “the linchpin” of a substantively reasonable sentence
• noting that there is likely to be an “expansive” universe of reasonable sentences in any particular case
• noting that Gall made clear that district courts have “wide latitude in making individualized sentencing determinations, thus guarding against the institutionalization of an impermissible presumption that outside-the-range sentences are unreasonable”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).