United States v. Susi

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that the mandate rule “forecloses relitigation of issues expressly or impliedly decided by the appellate court”
• holding a “below-Guidelines sentence is . . . entitled to a presumption of reasonableness”
• finding that the sentencing court didn’t punish the defendant for exercising his right to go to trial based on “the entirety of the sentencing transcript,” even though “several portions” suggested otherwise when read in isolation
• During resentencing, there is no requirement to “entertain new evidence and arguments where such is not necessary to effectuate the court’s sentencing intent.”
• During resentencing, there is no requirement to “entertain new evidence and arguments where such is not necessary to effectuate the court’s sentencing intent.”
• finding no \requirement that district courts disregard a prior waiver and entertain new evidence and arguments where such is not necessary to effectuate the court’s sentencing intent\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).