United States v. Wilken

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because the district court properly applied an enhancement that “controlled the Guidelines range for [the defendant’s] sentence,” any error in applying an unrelated enhancement was harmless
• holding that unless Congress “remove[s] prior drug offenses as qualifiers for the career offender provision,” a district court does not abuse its discretion by refusing to deviate from the advisory guideline range based on a policy disagreement
• “[A] district court does not err by refusing to depart or vary downward based on the Guidelines’ disparate 6 treatment of crack and powder cocaine.” (citation omitted)
• “Even where we find an error in calculating the Guidelines range, . . . we need not vacate and remand the sentence if the error w as harmless.”
• reviewing application of sentencing enhancement for harmless error

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).