First Circuit· 1/9/2019

United States v. Rios-Rivera

Citations

913 F.3d 38

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).

Judges: Howard, Thompson, Barron

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

19 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

38 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named United States v. Rios-Rivera

2 other CourtListener records share this case 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.