United States v. Negroni

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that district court erred in failing to explain reasons for downward variance
• identifying “fail[ure] to consider the § 3553(a) factors” as indicative of procedural error (quoting Gall, 552 U.S. at 51)
• vacating a sentence where the Guidelines range was 70 to 87 months’ imprisonment and the district court had imposed 60 months’ probation, noting that such a variance “should have been accompanied by a thorough justification of the sentence”
• “While the District Court identified the concern and stated it had considered [the need to avoid unwarranted sentencing disparities], it provided no explanation for why the sentence it imposed was justified despite the clear disparity it seemed to create.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).