Voleck v. Tennant

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that the First Step Act asks the court to calculate the applicable guidelines “‘as if’ the crack-cocaine sentencing range had been reduced under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, not as if other changes had been made to sentencing law in the intervening years.”
• affirming the district court’s denial for relief under the First Step Act where it was “clear that the court reasoned through [Appellant’s] arguments”
• noting the District Court provided a sufficient explanation for denying a First Step Act sentence reduction and “did not need to explicitly address [the defendant’s] arguments that he would not be a danger to the community if released given his age and his health struggles”
• “All told, our decisions and most of our sister circuits permit defendants to raise these intervening developments, such as changes to the career-offender guidelines, as grounds for reducing a sentence, and they permit (but do not require
• “[The Fair Step Act] asks the court to sentence . . . “as if” the crack- cocaine sentencing range had been reduced under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, not as if other changes had been made to sentencing law in the intervening years.”
• discussing Boulding, 960 F.3d at 776-78

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).