United States v. Sayad

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that “the district court’s single use of [a] term as descriptive shorthand was not . . . unreasonable.”
• summarizing conflicting precedent regarding the proper framing of a challenge based on a sentencing court's consideration of an impermissible factor
• “[A] district court’s sentence is substantially unreasonable only if it is arbitrary, capricious, whimsical, or manifestly unreasonable.” (quotation omitted)
• “[A] . . . sentence is substantively unreasonable only if it is arbitrary, capricious, whimsical, or manifestly unreasonable.”
• “Unlike procedural reasonableness review, which focuses on the permissibility of relying on a particular factor, substantive reasonableness review broadly looks to whether the district court abused its discretion in weighing permissible § 3553(a
• “Generally, a district court’s use of an improper factor invokes procedural review.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).