United States v. McDowell

How courts have described this case

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

• \[S]entencing judges . . . are not required to consider events that have not yet occurred.\
• “Lazenby was premised on a method of analysis that the Supreme Court rejected . . . so its precedential value is suspect.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• United States v. James Fry
  Eighth Circuit· 2015-07-01· cited 65×
• United States v. Lazaro Soliz
  Eighth Circuit· 2017-05-25· cited 12×
• United States v. Bishoff
  First Circuit· 2023-01-19· cited 9×
• United States v. Esther Durham
  Eighth Circuit· 2016-09-06· cited 3×
• United States v. Christina Barrera
  Eighth Circuit· 2024-08-14

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Gall v. United States
  Supreme Court· 2007-12-10· cited 20,598×
• United States v. Olano
  Supreme Court· 1993-04-26· cited 16,571×
• United States v. Perkins
  Eighth Circuit· 2008-06-02· cited 209×
• United States v. Lynn Marie Lazenby, United States of America v. Christine Marie Goodwin
  Eighth Circuit· 2006-03-10· cited 99×
• United States v. Casey Scott Patten
  Eighth Circuit· 2005-02-15· cited 54×
• United States v. Francisco Lainez-Leiva, Also Known as Roberto Cisnero, Oscar Gonzalez and Jose Rodolfo Moreno-Martinez
  Second Circuit· 1997-11-03· cited 45×
• United States v. M.R.M.
  Eighth Circuit· 2008-01-25· cited 26×
• United States v. Maxwell
  Eighth Circuit· 2011-12-22· cited 24×
• United States v. Dixon
  Eighth Circuit· 2011-08-15· cited 17×
• United States v. McGhee
  Eighth Circuit· 2008-01-16· cited 15×