United States v. Roland Long

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the language in 18 U.S.C. § 3582 (c)(2) is \doubly discretionary\ and hence does not \entitle\ a defendant to a sentence reduction (citation omitted)
• noting that a legal conclusion as to whether § 3582(c)(2) authorizes a modification is reviewed de novo, and that a discretionary decision as to whether to grant an authorized modification is reviewed for an abuse of discretion
• noting we review de novo the legal conclusion that a defendant is eligible for an 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) reduction and review for abuse of discretion the decision to grant or deny a reduction
• finding eligible defendant not entitled to sentence reduction after sentencing guidelines changed
• abuse-of-discretion review of discretionary decision whether to grant authorized § 3582(c)(2) modification

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).