United States v. Sabillon-Umana

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 record can reveal commentary \from the sentencing judge making clear that its error in applying the guidelines didn't adversely affect the defendant's ultimate sentence\
• noting that we must “follow earlier, settled precedent over a subsequent deviation therefrom” (cleaned up) (quoting Haynes v. Williams, 88 F.3d 898, 900 n.4 (10th Cir. 1996))
• stating that whether the Constitution allows a district court to either decrease or increase a defendant’s sentence based on facts found “without the aid of a jury or the defendant’s consent” is “far from certain”
• stating that whether the Constitution allows a district court to either decrease or increase a defendant’s sentence based on facts found “without the aid of a jury or the defendant’s consent” is “far from certain”
• acknowledging that remanding for resentencing does not help the defendant or enhance the integrity of judicial proceedings when a district judge analyzes a case under alternative theories and indicates he or she would arrive at the same sentencing conclusion either way
• application of an erroneous Guidelines range \ 'runs the risk of affecting the ultimate sentence regardless of whether the court ultimately imposes a sentence within or outside' \ that range

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).