Topic
Every decision we've filed under Sentencing Guidelines.
The Third Circuit affirmed the appellant's drug trafficking and firearm convictions but vacated his mandatory life sentence for remand.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a seventy-two-month prison sentence for a defendant convicted of mail fraud and aggravated identity theft. The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in rejecting arguments based on national sentencing averages and mitigating factors.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a defendant's sentence for drug conspiracy, rejecting her claim that the district court failed to properly weigh sentencing factors. The court held that the district court acted within its discretion by considering the defendant's health issues while emphasizing the need for deterrence.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the convictions and sentence of Michael Christopher Rowser for conspiracy to commit bribery and fraud. The court held that circumstantial evidence was sufficient to prove the defendant's guilt and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court's denial of a motion for sentence reduction under Section thirty-five hundred eighty-two, subsection C, paragraph two. The appellate court found no reversible error in the district court's explanation for rejecting the defendant's request for compassionate release.
The Third Circuit affirmed a four-level sentencing enhancement for possessing a firearm with a modified serial number. The court held that the presence of a separate legible serial number on the same gun does not prevent the enhancement from applying.
The Eleventh Circuit affirmed a 120-month sentence for human smuggling and firearm possession, rejecting the defendant's claim of substantive unreasonableness. The court held that the district court adequately explained its upward variance and that the sentence remained well below the statutory maximum.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed a one hundred month sentence for a convicted felon possessing a firearm. The court held that any potential error in calculating the Sentencing Guidelines range was harmless because the district court would have imposed the same sentence regardless.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court order denying a defendant's motion for a sentence reduction. The court found no error in the lower court's application of the Sentencing Guidelines and its consideration of statutory factors.
The Fourth Circuit affirmed a district court order denying a defendant's motion for a sentence reduction. The court held that the defendant was ineligible for relief under Amendment Eight Hundred Twenty-One because he possessed a firearm during the underlying offense.