United States v. Sandra Rivera

How courts have described this case

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

• holding impermissible factor was dominant in the revocation sentence because it was “the district court’s main focus throughout the hearing”
• explaining that the Port was a market participant when it “offer[ed] a service and receives payments tied to the costs of providing the service, just as would a private business” in a fee-for-service approach
• a district court commits a sentencing error “when an impermissible consideration is a dominant factor in the court’s revocation sentence, but not when it is merely a secondary concern or an additional justification for the sentence” (internal citation omitted)
• not distinguishing between procedural and substantive errors

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).