United States v. Rodney Mack, Jr.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that Almendarez-Torres remains binding authority notwithstanding Alleyne and that a jury need not find a defendant’s convictions were “second or subsequent” under § 924(c)(l)(C)(I)
• holding that an Alleyne error is harmless where the record would support a jury verdict on the applicable sentencing enhancement
• noting that “the defendant [must] carry [a] heavy burden to show that the evidence was insufficient”
• holding in a post-Alleyne case that the lack of a specific jury finding as to brandishing was harmless where the evidence of brandishing offered at trial was overwhelming
• “[N]o presumption of prejudice arises merely from the fact that improper contact occurred.”
• “To determine whether the second part of the [plain error] test is met, we need only consider whether the error is ‘plain’—in other words, clear or obvious—at the present time of our appellate review.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).