Tenth Circuit· 5/7/1996

United States v. Moore

Citations

83 F.3d 1231
1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 10464
1996 WL 229222

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the vacation of a defendant's sentence requires \the district court to exercise its inherent discretion to determine the appropriate scope of the resentencing proceedings\
noting that district court \has the discretion to determine the scope of the resentencing\
“Such a failure to exercise discretion when there is an obligation to do so is itself error.” (citation omitted)
“[W]here the district court itself ordered the vacation, it has the discretion to determine the scope of the resentencing.”
when a sentence is vacated under § 2255, “the original sentence . . . is eviscerated”
footnote to this passage explained that this case did not “present the issue of whether the district court on remand may consider new evidence that could increase Moore’s sentence.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Seymour, Brorby, Murphy

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

54 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.