Third Circuit· 2/12/2008

United States v. Wise

Citations

515 F.3d 207
2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 3104
2008 WL 361089

How courts have described this case

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

affirming sentence where district court clearly indicated that it understood the full scope of its discretion to consider the crack/powder disparity in imposing sentence
reviewing jury instructions for plain error after defendant failed to raise an argument before the district court
“[I]f the asserted procedural error is purely factual, our review is highly deferential and we will conclude there has been an abuse of discretion only if the district court’s findings are clearly erroneous.”
“If we determine that the district court has committed no significant procedural error, we then review the substantive reasonableness of the sentence under an abuse-of-discretion standard ... .”
“If we determine that the district court has committed no significant procedural error, we then review the substantive reasonableness of the sentence under an abuse-of-discretion standard ... .”
“As Gall [v. United States, 552 U.S. 38, 49 (2007)] makes clear, a district court must begin the [sentencing] process by correctly calculating the applicable Guidelines range.” (emphasis added)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Fuentes, Jordan, Dubois

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

132 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

31 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named United States v. Wise

35 other CourtListener records share this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.