Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 44 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from United States v. Magallanez.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Magallanez Anchor | green | “district courts are still required to consider guideline ranges, which are determined through application of the preponderance standard, just as they were before.” | 9 |
| 2 | United States v. Magallanez | green | “sentencing courts maintained the power to consider the broad context of a defendant's conduct, even when a court's view of the conduct conflicted with the jury's verdict.” | 8 |
| 3 | United States v. Joshua Price, Jr. | green | “above the statutory maximum permitted by the statute of conviction.” | 8 |
| 4 | United States v. O'Flanagan | green | “it is well-established that sentencing factors need not be charged in an indictment and need only be proved to the sentencing judge by a preponderance of the evidence” | 7 |
| 5 | United States v. Olsen | green | “recognizing 'strong arguments that relevant conduct causing a dramatic increase in sentence ought to be subject to a higher standard of proof,” | 7 |
| 6 | United States v. Ray | green | “apprendi does not apply to the present advisory-guidelines regime.” | 5 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.