United States v. Michael Johnson

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that, as the defendant was sentenced within the statutory limits, he had not made a threshold showing of a disproportionality
• holding that a 1,680-month sentence was reasonable to reflect the need to protect children from the defendant, who was convicted of producing and distributing child pornography
• holding that a 1,680-month sentence was reason- able to reflect the need to protect children from the defendant, who was convicted of producing and distributing child pornography
• holding that a 140-year sentence for producing and distributing child pornography was not cruel and unusual because the sentence was within the statutory limits, and, thus, was not disproportionate to the offense
• holding that, because the district court sentenced defendant within the statutory limits, defendant had failed to make a threshold showing of disproportionality, and, thus, we did not need to consider the second step in rejecting defendant’s Eighth Amendment challenge
• holding the same for the offense of “performing a lewd act in front of a minor”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).