United States v. Michael A. Crisp

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that a district court cannot focus single-mindedly on one factor to the detriment of all others
• concluding that a sentence was unreasonable where the district court “focused single-mindedly” on one factor “to the detriment of all of the other sentencing factors.”
• explaining that a sentencing court’s “single-minded[ ]” focus on one factor to the detriment of other relevant sentencing factors “is a symptom of an unreasonable sentence” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• reversing as unreasonable a sentence of 5 hours’ detention when the advisory guidelines range was 12 to 15 months

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).