Vicks v. California

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that a reviewing panel may remand “for limited purposes, for broader purposes, or to permit further evidence to be presented on the second round even when a party has been given an opportunity but fails to do so on the first round”
• explaining that “a reviewing panel may re- mand . . . to permit further evidence to be presented” by the gov- ernment at a resentencing hearing “even when [the government] ha[d] been given an opportunity but fail[ed] to do so on the first round”
• “[W]e have adopted a holistic approach to resentencing, treating a criminal sentence as a package of sanctions that may be fully revisited upon resentencing”
• “[W]e have often held that a general vacatur of a sentence by default allows for resentencing de novo.”
• “[U]nder the prior precedent rule, we are bound to follow a prior binding precedent unless and until it is overruled by this court en banc or by the Supreme Court.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).