United States v. Rios-Rivera

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that - 4 - defendant, by failing to object below, \forfeited any possible procedural objection\
• holding that Class does not preclude application of plain-error review to forfeited constitutional claim
• holding the district court did not plainly err in upholding § 2423(a) as a valid exercise of Congress's authority under the Territory Clause
• noting that jurisdiction wasn’t implicated by a defendant’s challenges to Congress’s constitutional authority to enact the statute of conviction
• finding forfeiture of Rule 32(h) argument where, after announcing the sentence, the district court asked if there was \anything else\ counsel wanted to discuss and defense counsel replied, \That is all\
• \[T]here is no discernible difference between departure and variance sentences.\ (citing United States v. Santini-Santiago, 846 F.3d 487, 489–90 (1st Cir. 2017))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named United States v. Rios-Rivera

2 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• United States v. Rios-Rivera
  Fifth Circuit· 1996-02-29
• United States v. Rios-Rivera
  Fifth Circuit· 2006-02-23