Search for: "United States v. Booker"
Results 41 - 60
of 847
Sorted by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
9 Nov 2006, 12:38 pm
Nov. 9, 2006) (available here): "We address in this case further aspects of the sentencing process for our Circuit in the wake of the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. [read post]
17 Jul 2008, 1:48 am
" United States v. [read post]
18 Dec 2006, 1:12 pm
" Judge Berzon, dissenting, begins her opinion this way: "The majority's peculiar interpretation of the word 'reasonableness' not only defies its common usage in the English language, but more importantly, runs contrary to what this court decided, sitting en banc, in United States v. [read post]
10 Jan 2007, 1:13 pm
United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), to the co-conspirators "files. [read post]
17 Jun 2010, 9:52 am
United States [Cornell LII backgrounder] that the court's decision in United States v. [read post]
19 May 2005, 1:51 pm
United States, 2005 WL 711916 (E.D.N.Y.); United States v. [read post]
8 Jun 2009, 12:13 am
United States v. [read post]
17 Aug 2006, 10:58 am
Amy Baron-Evans, the National Sentencing Resource Counsel to the Federal Public and Community Defenders, has produced an extraordinary memorandum entitled "The Continuing Struggle for Fair, Effective and Constitutional Sentencing After United States v. [read post]
26 May 2009, 12:41 pm
Ct. 586, 594 (2007); United States v. [read post]
7 Aug 2008, 8:01 pm
Yesterday, the First Circuit announced its decision in United States v. [read post]
11 Jan 2007, 10:07 am
Jan 11, 2007) (available here), resolved an interesting little issue concerning Booker's reach:In this appeal, we consider whether United States v. [read post]
7 Feb 2007, 1:01 pm
" United States v. [read post]
5 Mar 2007, 1:50 pm
See United States v. [read post]
28 Jul 2005, 10:20 pm
We had previously discussed in this post the First Circuit's opinion in United States v. [read post]
20 Mar 2012, 4:22 am
The Court's holding in Apprendi led to its holding that the United States Sentencing Guidelines were advisory, rather than mandatory, five years later, in United States v. [read post]
3 Mar 2007, 12:25 pm
And the penultimate substantive paragraph also has this interesting discussion of the pending SCOTUS reasonableness work (background here):We pause briefly to comment on the status of this case in light of the Supreme Court's pending decision in United States v. [read post]
4 Jun 2005, 10:01 am
In United States v. [read post]
21 Feb 2009, 1:52 pm
" See: United States v. [read post]
4 Mar 2005, 7:01 pm
In United States v. [read post]
29 Dec 2006, 11:59 am
The 2-1 published decision can be found at: United States v. [read post]
