United States v. Winckelmann

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that it was not an abuse of discretion to reassess the sentence where the maximum amount of confinement decreased from 115 years to 51 years
• holding that it was not an abuse of discretion to reassess the sentence where the maximum amount of confinement decreased from 115 years to 51 years
• holding that it was not an abuse of discretion to reassess the sentence where the maximum amount of confinement decreased from 115 years to 51 years
• holding CCAs may reassess a sentence if it “can determine to its satisfaction that, absent any error, the sentence adjudged would have been of at least a certain severity”
• holding CCAs may reassess a sentence if it “can determine to its satisfaction that, absent any error, the sentence adjudged would have been of at least a certain severity” (citation omitted)
• holding Courts of Criminal Appeals may reassess a sentence if it “can determine to its satisfaction that, absent any error, the sentence adjudged would have been of at least a certain severity”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Other cases named United States v. Winckelmann

4 other CourtListener records share this case name.

• United States v. Winckelmann
  Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces· 2011-12-12· cited 65×
• United States v. Winckelmann
  Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces· 2011-07-07
• United States v. Winckelmann
  Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces· 2012-11-01
• United States v. Winckelmann
  Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces· 2012-11-26