Search for: "U.S. v. Kimbrough"
Results 21 - 40
of 131
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
20 Mar 2011, 8:14 am
New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) and Blakely v. [read post]
7 Mar 2011, 9:05 pm
” Kimbrough, 69 F.3d at 727. [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 8:38 pm
New York, 337 U.S. 241, 246-47 (1949). [read post]
2 Mar 2011, 3:24 pm
New York, 337 U.S. 241, 246-47 (1949). [read post]
24 Jan 2011, 10:48 am
“Kimbrough opened the door for policy disagreements with the Guidelines and Welton closed it only to preclude arguments based on crack/powder disparities when those challenges stemmed from the [...] [read post]
15 Dec 2010, 2:00 am
Kimbrough Constr. [read post]
18 Oct 2010, 2:36 pm
The Supreme Court's decision in Kimbrough v. [read post]
2 Aug 2010, 5:20 pm
The United States Supreme Court even ruled in Kimbrough v. [read post]
20 Jul 2010, 8:25 am
Because the defendant was sentenced before Kimbrough v. [read post]
18 Jun 2010, 1:10 pm
U.S. [read post]
29 Apr 2010, 2:42 pm
Sure, some of you were confused the first time that the Supreme Court said you don't have to adhere to the sentencing disparity in their 2007 Kimbrough v. [read post]
5 Oct 2009, 11:25 am
U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals, October 01, 2009 US v. [read post]
15 Sep 2009, 11:39 am
Joining the First Circuit and adding to the circuit split on this issue, the Third Circuit has held that, under the logic of Kimbrough v. [read post]
14 Sep 2009, 3:01 pm
Prior to Kimbrough we addressed this issue in United States v. [read post]
10 Aug 2009, 10:04 am
U.S. v. [read post]
19 Jul 2009, 11:48 am
Here is the abstract: In Kimbrough v. [read post]
17 Jun 2009, 9:32 am
United States, 552 U.S. 38 (2007), and Kimbrough v. [read post]
26 May 2009, 12:41 pm
Booker, 543 U.S. at 258-60. [read post]
6 May 2009, 1:40 am
Delaney)U.S. [read post]
2 May 2009, 8:43 pm
Although the U.S. [read post]
