United States v. Vincent Caterino

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court’s discretion to consider any issue relevant to sentencing may be limited by the express or implied limits in the remand mandate
• holding that in absence of clear evidence to the contrary, defendant’s entire sentence was vacated and all sentencing issues were open to reargument following remand
• district court violated the Double Jeopardy Clause because there was no evidence that it actually apportioned the losses
• law of the case not implicated by affirmance based on waiver of issue
• “In the case at bar, post-sentencing conduct is not at issue.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).