green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
35.9 score
“the language of the guideline policy statements indicates that only when any one of can be characterized as extraordinary does the district court have discretion to depart from the guideline's sentencing range.”
Treatment trajectory · 1992 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1992
2009
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 50 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (verbatim quote)
United States v. Sally
the language of the guideline policy statements indicates that only when any one of can be characterized as extraordinary does the district court have discretion to depart from the guideline's sentencing range.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Rodney Murray
Although the District Court’s dismissal was without prejudice, a district court lacks authority to modify a sentence for substantial assistance in the absence of an agreement or where the required showing under Wade has not been made, see United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Jackson
United States v. Seligsohn, 981 F.2d 1418, 1428 (3d Cir.1992) (citing United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992)).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Dowdy
United States v. Seligsohn, 981 F.2d 1418, 1428 (3d Cir.1992) (citing United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Parker
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Thus, no subsequent panel overrules the holding in a precedential opinion of a previous panel.’” Mariana v. Fisher, 338 F.3d 189, 201 (3d Cir. 2003). 5 Prior to Booker, “[A]s a general proposition, sentence disparity among co-defendants [was] not a sufficient basis for departure.” Seligsohn, 981 F.2d at 1428 (citing United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir. 1992)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Daryl Lonard Parker, A/K/A Daryl Lenard Parker, A/K/A Junior Parker, A/K/A Jr Parker, A/K/A Jr, Daryl Lonard Parker
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
Prior to Booker , "[A]s a general proposition, sentence disparity among co-defendants [was] not a sufficient basis for departure.” Seligsohn, 981 F.2d at 1428 (citing United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992)).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Minutoli
Rather, n.3 (3d Cir. 1993); United States v. the argument goes, the Court was being Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir. disingenuous because it “was actually 1992). 4 The Courts of Appeals, virtually concluding” (emphasis added) “that it unanimously, accept this general rule lacked the authority to [depart] based on whether that rule be framed in the facts of this case.” Accordingly, the jurisdictional terms, as our cases frame it, dissent continues, “the sentence imposed or in terms of unfettered discretion where ‘resulted from’ an incorrect application of there has not been an …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Lisa Ann Minutoli
(2×)
Id. 16 United States v. Georgiadis, 933 F.2d 1219, 1222 (3d Cir.1991); see also, e.g., United States v. Gori, 324 F.3d 234, 239 (3d Cir.2003); United States v. Powell, 269 F.3d 175, 178-80 (3d Cir.2001); United States v. Stevens, 223 F.3d 239, 247-48 (3d Cir.2000); United States v. Evans, 49 F.3d 109, 111 (3d Cir.1995); United States v. Mummert, 34 F.3d 201, 205 (3d Cir.1994); United States v. Gaskill, 991 F.2d 82, 84 (3d Cir.1993); United States v. Love, 985 F.2d 732, 734, n. 3 (3d Cir.1993); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir.1992). 4 The Courts of Appeals, virtually unanimo…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Merced
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
United States v. Torres, 251 F.3d 138, 145 (3d Cir.2001); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Isabel Dominguez
As a preliminary matter, we note that we may review a refusal to depart downward when it is based on the court’s erroneous belief that it lacked discretion. *195 See, e.g., United States v. Gaskill, 991 F.2d 82, 84 (3d Cir.1993) (citing United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir.1992)); 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a)(2).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Allen
United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
Nolan Leigh Mendenhall, in No. 00-1500
United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
In Re Sealed Case No. 97-3112
(2×)
See United States v. Reina, 905 F.2d 638, 641 (2d Cir.1990); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992); United States v. Wade, 936 F.2d 169, 171 (4th Cir.1991); United States v. Levy, 904 F.2d 1026, 1035 (6th Cir.1990); United States v. Goroza, 941 F.2d 905, 908-09 (9th Cir.1991); United States v. Lee, 989 F.2d 377, 379 (10th Cir.1993); United States v. Alamin, 895 F.2d 1335, 1337 (11th Cir.1990).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Hitham Abuhouran A/K/A Steve Houran
(2×)
Although we have previously ruled that a district court has no such authority, see United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992), we must address this question anew because of the sea change in the departure area effected by Koon .
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Donald Keith Blackwell
(2×)
United States v. Wogan, 938 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 969 , 112 S.Ct. 441 , 116 L.Ed.2d 460 (1991); United States v. Joyner, 924 F.2d 454, 461 (2d Cir.1991); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992); United States v. Withers, 100 F.3d 1142 , 1149 & n. 3 (4th Cir.1996), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 117 S.Ct. 1282 , 137 L.Ed.2d 358 (1997); United States v. Pierce, 893 F.2d 669, 678 (5th Cir.1990); United States v. Romano, 970 F.2d 164, 167 (6th Cir.1992); United States v. Dillard, 43 F.3d 299, 311 (7th Cir.1994); United States v. Torres, 921 F.2d 196, 197 …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Blackwell
United States v. Wogan, 938 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 969 (1991); United States v. Joyner, 924 F.2d 454, 461 (2d Cir. 1991); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir. 1992); United States v. Withers, 100 F.3d 1142 , 1149 & n.3 (4th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. comparison to the eight ounces underlying Mr. Blackwell's conviction.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Abuhouran
In United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992), the court of appeals stated that, pursuant to Wade v. United States, 504 U.S. 181 , 112 S.Ct. 1840 , 118 L.Ed.2d 524 (1992), the district court lacked the power to depart under § 5K1.1 in the absence of a motion by the government.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Booher
Wade v. United States, 504 U.S. 181, 185 , 112 S.Ct. 1840, 1843-44 , 118 L.Ed.2d 524 (1992); United States v. Paramo, 998 F.2d 1212, 1218 (3d Cir.1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1121 , 114 S.Ct. 1076 , 127 L.Ed.2d 393 (1994); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Blackwell
United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Bissell
United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Juliano
Wade v. United States, 504 U.S. 181, 185 , 112 S.Ct. 1840, 1843 , 118 L.Ed.2d 524 (1992); United States v. Carrara, 49 F.3d 105, 107 (3d Cir.1995); United States v. Love, 985 F.2d 732, 734 (3d Cir.1993); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992) (“We will affirm the district court’s holding that it lacked the power to depart downward because of [defendant’s] substantial assistance in the absence of a motion by the government.”); United States v. Gonzales, 927 F.2d 139, 145 (3d Cir.1991); United States v. Bruno, 897 F.2d 691, 696 (3d Cir.1990); see United States v. Kaye,…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Withers
See United States v. Wogan, 938 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 (1st Cir. 1991); United States v. Joyner, 924 F.2d 454, 459-61 (2d Cir. 1991); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir. 1992); United States v. Pierce, 893 F.2d 669, 678 (5th Cir. 1990); United States v. LaSalle , 948 F.2d 215, 218 (6th Cir. 1991); United States v. Dillard, 43 F.3d 299, 311 (7th Cir. 1994); United States v. Torres, 921 F.2d 196, 197 (8th Cir. 1990); United States v. Vilchez, 967 F.2d 1351, 1353-55 (9th Cir. 1992); United States v. Garza, 1 F.3d 1098, 1101 (10th Cir. 1993); United States v. Hendrieth, 922 F.2d 748, …
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Renee Withers, United States of America v. Renee Withers
See United States v. Wogan, 938 F.2d 1446 , 1448^19 (1st Cir.1991); United States v. Joyner, 924 F.2d 454, 459-61 (2d Cir.1991); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992); United States v. Pierce, 893 F.2d 669, 678 (5th Cir.1990); United States v. LaSalle, 948 F.2d 215, 218 (6th Cir.1991); United States v. Dillard, 43 F.3d 299, 311 (7th Cir.1994); United States v. Torres, 921 F.2d 196, 197 (8th Cir.1990); United States v. Vilchez, 967 F.2d 1351, 1353-55 (9th Cir.1992); United States v. Garza, 1 F.3d 1098, 1101 (10th Cir.1993); United States v: Hendrieth, 922 F.2d 748, 752 (11th…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Antonio Meza
See, e.g., United States v. Fonville, 5 F.3d 781, 783-84 (4th Cir.1993), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 1839 , 128 L.Ed.2d 466 (1994); United States v. Garza, 1 F.3d 1098, 1100-01 (10th Cir.), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 617 , 126 L.Ed.2d 581 (1993); United States v. Womack, 985 F.2d 395, 400 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 114 S.Ct. 276 , 126 L.Ed.2d 227 (1993); United States v. Ives, 984 F.2d 649, 650 (5th Cir.), *122 cert. denied, - U.S. -, 114 S.Ct. 111 , 126 L.Ed.2d 76 (1993); United States v. Williams, 980 F.2d 1463, 1467 (D.C.Cir.1992); United States v. Petti, 973 F.2d 144…
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. David George Brannan
See United States v. Holifield, 53 F.3d 11, 12-13 (3d Cir.1995); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Brannan
See United States v. Holifield, 53 F.3d 11, 12-13 (3d Cir. 1995); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir. 1992).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Alvarez
See United States v. Ellis, 975 F.2d 1061, 1065-66 (4th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 1352 (1993); United States v. Vilchez, 967 F.2d 1351 , 1353- 55 (9th Cir. 1992); United States v. Higgens, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir. 1992); United States v. Meja, 953 F.2d 461, 467-68 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1983 (1992); United States v. Woogan, 938 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 441 (1991); United States v. Joyner, 924 F.2d 454, 459-61 (2d Cir. 1991).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Alvarez
See United States v. Ellis, 975 F.2d 1061, 1065-66 (4th Cir.1992), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 113 S.Ct. 1352 , 122 L.Ed.2d 733 (1993); United States v. Vilchez, 967 F.2d 1351, 1353-55 (9th Cir.1992); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992); United States v. Mejia, 953 F.2d 461, 467-68 (9th Cir.1991), cert. denied, 504 U.S. 926 , 112 S.Ct. 1983 , 118 L.Ed.2d 581 (1992); United States v. Wogan, 938 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 502 U.S. 969 , 112 S.Ct. 441 , 116 L.Ed.2d 460 (1991); United States v. Joyner, 924 F.2d 454, 459-61 (2d Cir.1991).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Frank Joseph Evans
See United States v. Gaskill, 991 F.2d 82, 84 (3d Cir.1993); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Evans
See United States v. Gaskill, 991 F.2d 82, 84 (3d Cir. 1993); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir. 1992).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Salvador Dimarco
United States v. Patterson, 15 F.3d 169, 171 (11th Cir.1994); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir.1992); United States v. Hilton, 946 F.2d 955, 957 (1st Cir.1991); United States v. Soto, 918 F.2d 882, 883 (10th Cir.1990); United States v. Adeniyi, 912 F.2d 615, 619 (2d Cir.1990); United States v. Pighetti, 898 F.2d 3, 4-5 (1st Cir.1990); United States v. Morales, 898 F.2d 99, 101-03 (9th Cir.1990); United States v. Bayerle, 898 F.2d 28, 30-31 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 819 , 111 S.Ct. 65 , 112 L.Ed.2d 39 (1990); United States v. Franz, 886 F.2d 973, 976-81 (7th Cir.1989…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. DiMarco
United States v. Patterson, 15 F.3d 169, 171 (11th Cir. 1994); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir. 1992); United States v. Hilton, 946 F.2d 955, 957 (1st Cir. 1991); United States v. Soto, 918 F.2d 882, 883 (10th Cir. 1990); United States v. Adeniyi, 912 F.2d 615, 619 (2d Cir. 1990); United States v. Pighetti, 898 F.2d 3, 4-5 (1st Cir. 1990); United States v. Morales, 898 F.2d 99, 101-03 (9th Cir. 1990); United States v. Bayerle, 898 F.2d 28, 30-31 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 498 U.S. 819 2 (1990); United States v. Franz, 886 F.2d 973, 976-81 (7th Cir. 1989); United States v. Ev…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Kenneth Shoupe
(2×)
United States v. Benish, 5 F.3d 20, 26 (3d Cir.1993); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir.1992) 8 From our review of the briefs in Shoupe I and Shoupe II, it is clear that this issue was not presented previously.
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Schein
United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir. 1992).
cited
Cited as authority (rule)
United States of America, at No. 94-7000 v. Michael M. Schein, at No. 93-7809
United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Monaco
Indeed, as we recognized in United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir. 1992), when a "not ordinarily relevant" factor can be characterized as "extraordinary," a district court has the power to depart from the guidelines.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Thomas L. Monaco
Indeed, as we recognized in United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992), when a “not ordinarily relevant” factor can be characterized" as “extraordinary,” a district court has the power to depart from the guidelines.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Elliott Sharapan, Victor Sharapan
See, e.g., United States v. Gaskill, 991 F.2d 82, 84-85 (3d Cir.1993); United States v. Seligsohn, 981 F.2d 1418, 1428-29 (3d Cir.1992); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845-46 (3d Cir.1992); United States v. Shoupe, 929 F.2d 116, 120-21 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 382 , 116 L.Ed.2d 333 (1991); United States v. Pharr, 916 F.2d 129, 133 (3d Cir.1990), ce rt. denied, — U.S. -, 111 S.Ct. 2274 , 114 L.Ed.2d 725 (1991); United States v. Rosen, 896 F.2d 789, 792 (3d Cir.1990).
examined
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Gene Francis Newby and Raynaldo Barber. Gene Francis Newby (Appellant in No. 92-5711). Raynaldo Barber (Appellant in No. 92-5712)
(4×)
also: Cited "see"
United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. William T.C. Gaskill
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 844 (3d Cir.1992); 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (a)(2). 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (b) provides that a sentencing court may depart from the ranges established by the Sentencing Guidelines when the judge finds “an aggravating or mitigating circumstance of a kind, or to a degree, not adequately taken into consideration by the Sentencing Commission in formulating the guidelines.” As part of its general instructions to the Commission, Congress indicated that the Guidelines and policy statements in recommending a term of imprisonment, or its length, should reflect the genera…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. David Glenn Ives
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
See, e.g., United States v. Wogan, 938 F.2d 1446, 1448-1449 (1st Cir.1991), cert. denied, - U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 441 , 116 L.Ed.2d 460 (1991); United States v. Joyner, 924 F.2d 454, 460-462 (2nd Cir.1991); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3rd Cir.1992); United States v. Kant, 946 F.2d 267 , 270 n. 3 (4th Cir.1991); United States v. Gessa, 944 F.2d 265, 270 (6th Cir.1991) (noting intra-circuit conflict), vacated upon decision to reconsider the issue en banc, 944 F.2d at 271 (6th Cir.1991); United States v. Cea, 914 F.2d 881, 889 (7th Cir.1990); United States v. Torres, 921 F.2d 196, 19…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Marlene Esther Seligsohn, A/K/A Esther Demarco, in No. 91-2083. United States of America v. Melvin Seligsohn, A/K/A Mickey Demarco, in No. 91-2093. United States of America, in No. 92-1038 v. Melvin Seligsohn, A/K/A Mickey Demarco. United States of America v. Mark Seligsohn, A/K/A Mark Mancini, in No. 91-2100
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
Although the Guideline imprisonment range was 168 to 210 months, the district court reduced the sentence to 150 months because of Mr. Seligsohn's age, and to reduce disparity with the punishment assessed against co-defendants. 64 Under section 5H1.1, departures on the basis of age are not normally permitted, United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992), but are permissible, for example, when the defendants are elderly and infirm and home confinement is equally efficient as well as being less costly.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Seligsohn
(2×)
Under section 5H1.1, departures on the basis of age are not normally permitted, United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992), but are permissible, for example, when the defendants are elderly and infirm and home confinement is equally efficient as well as being less costly.
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
United States v. Danny Ray Hall
See, e.g., United States v. Vilchez, 967 F.2d 1351, 1353-55 (9th Cir.1992); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir.1992); United States v. Mejia, 953 F.2d 461, 467-68 (9th Cir.1991), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 1983 , 118 L.Ed.2d 581 (1992); United States v. Wogan, 938 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 112 S.Ct. 441 , 116 L.Ed.2d 460 (1991); United States v. Joyner, 924 F.2d 454, 459-61 (2d Cir.1991); see also United States v. LaSalle, 948 F.2d 215, 218 (6th Cir.1991); United States v. Hendrieth, 922 F.2d 748, 752 (11th Cir.1991); United States v. To…
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. MATEO ALVAREZ
See United States v. Ellis, 975 F.2d 1061, 1065-66 (4th Cir. 1992), cert. denied, 113 S.Ct. 1352 (1993); United States v. Vilchez, 967 F.2d 1351 , 1353- 55 (9th Cir. 1992); United States v. Higgens, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3d Cir. 1992); United States v. Meja, 953 F.2d 461, 467-68 (9th Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 1983 (1992); United States v. Woogan, 938 F.2d 1446, 1448-49 (1st Cir.), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 441 (1991); United States v. Joyner, 924 F.2d 454, 459-61 (2d Cir. 1991).
discussed
Cited as authority (rule)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. DAVID GLENN IVES
(2×)
also: Cited "see"
The sentences were primarily the result of prosecutors' charging decisions, resulting from plea-bargains, not because of an exercise of unbridled discretion by sentencing courts. 2 See, e.g., United States v. Wogan, 938 F.2d 1446 , 1448- 1449 (1st Cir. 1991), cert. denied, 112 S.Ct. 441 (1991); United States v. Joyner, 924 F.2d 454, 460-462 (2nd Cir. 1991); United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841, 845 (3rd Cir. 1992); United States v. Kant, 946 F.2d 267 , 270 n.3 (4th Cir. 1991); United States v. Geesa, 944 F.2d 265, 270 (6th Cir. 1991) (noting intra- circuit conflict), vacated upon decision to…
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Detommaso
See United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841 , 846 n. 2 (3d Cir.1992).
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Saffer
See United States v. Higgins, 967 F.2d 841 , 846 n. 2 (3d Cir.1992).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Susan CLARK, Appellee,
v.
K-MART CORPORATION, Appellant
v.
K-MART CORPORATION, Appellant
91-3723.
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
Jun 15, 1992.
Published
ORDER
A majority of the active judges having voted for rehearing in banc in the above appeal, it is
ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court vacate the panel’s opinion and judgment filed May 22, 1992, and list the above case for rehearing in banc at the convenience of the court.