§Why CasetextPricing

USA v. Minor et al

MEMORANDUM IN SUPPORT re Set/Reset Hearings in Aid of Resentencing

23 Cited authorities

  1. United States v. Booker

    543 U.S. 220 (2005)   Cited 25,434 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding the Sentencing Guidelines are advisory

  2. Gall v. United States

    552 U.S. 38 (2007)   Cited 17,782 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Holding that we "must give due deference to the district court's decision that the § 3553 factors, on a whole, justify the extent of the variance."

  3. Apprendi v. New Jersey

    530 U.S. 466 (2000)   Cited 26,688 times   100 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[o]ther than the fact of a prior conviction, any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the prescribed statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and proved beyond a reasonable doubt”

  4. Blakely v. Washington

    542 U.S. 296 (2004)   Cited 16,638 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “[w]hen a judge inflicts punishment that the jury's verdict alone does not allow, the jury has not found all the facts ‘which the law makes essential to the punishment,’ and the judge exceeds his proper authority”

  5. Kimbrough v. United States

    552 U.S. 85 (2007)   Cited 3,936 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that variances can sometimes be based on the sentencing judge's disagreement with whether a guideline properly reflects the § 3553 factors

  6. Roper v. Simmons

    543 U.S. 551 (2005)   Cited 3,513 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding "that the death penalty cannot be imposed upon juvenile offenders"

  7. In re Winship

    397 U.S. 358 (1970)   Cited 11,666 times   24 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the government must prove every element of a crime beyond a reasonable doubt

  8. Jones v. United States

    526 U.S. 227 (1999)   Cited 1,905 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "under the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment and the notice and jury trial guarantees of the Sixth Amendment, any fact (other than prior conviction) that increases the maximum penalty for a crime must be charged in an indictment, submitted to a jury, and proven beyond a reasonable doubt"

  9. U.S. v. Williams

    517 F.3d 801 (5th Cir. 2008)   Cited 151 times
    Holding that a district court may rely upon factors already incorporated by the Guidelines to support a non-Guidelines sentence

  10. U.S. v. Ranum

    353 F. Supp. 2d 984 (E.D. Wis. 2005)   Cited 65 times
    Holding that equal weight should be given to each factor listed in § 3553 and courts must resolve conflicts between § 3553 factors and Guidelines

  11. Section 3553 - Imposition of a sentence

    18 U.S.C. § 3553   Cited 76,822 times   111 Legal Analyses
    Holding that district court must consider whether its decision will "protect the public from further crimes of the defendant"

  12. Section 3582 - Imposition of a sentence of imprisonment

    18 U.S.C. § 3582   Cited 55,136 times   66 Legal Analyses
    Granting district court discretion to modify sentence when Sentencing Guideline upon which sentence was based is subsequently amended

  13. Section 3742 - Review of a sentence

    18 U.S.C. § 3742   Cited 10,928 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the appellate court may reverse a sentence that is too low

  14. Section 3661 - Use of information for sentencing

    18 U.S.C. § 3661   Cited 1,151 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Ruling out any "limitation . . . on the information concerning the [offender's] background, character, and conduct" that the "court . . . may receive"

  15. Section 3551 - Authorized sentences

    18 U.S.C. § 3551   Cited 1,148 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Describing authorized sentences as probation, fine, or imprisonment