Notes of Decisions
United States v. Fidel Castro-Verdugo, 750 F.3d 1065 (9th Cir. 2014).
· cites it 12× “At sentencing, the district court imposed a period of probation along with a stayed custodial sentence, thereby exceeding the court’s authority under 18 U.S.C. § 3561 (a)(3). In 2013, Defendant again was convicted of illegal reentry which, in addition to constituting a new…”
United States v. James Little, 78 F.4th 453 (D.C. Cir. 2023).
· cites it 10× “Pushing back, the Government says 18 U.S.C. § 3561 (a)(3) is the kind of specific exception contemplated by § 3551(a), allowing a sentencing court to impose probation and imprisonment for a single petty offense.”
Arizona v. United States, 132 S. Ct. 2492 (2012).
· cites it 2× “); 18 U. S. C. §3561 . State law, by contrast, rules out probation as a possible sentence (and also eliminates the possibility of a pardon).”
United States v. H. Ty Warner, 792 F.3d 847 (7th Cir. 2015).
· cites it 4× “And Warner was eligible for proba- tion under 18 U.S.C. § 3561 . It was therefore up to the district court to select an ap- propriate sentence in accordance with the factors in 18 U.”
United States v. Lopez-Pastrana, 889 F.3d 13 (1st Cir. 2018).
· cites it 3× “See 18 U.S.C. § 3561 (a)(3). 6 Although a *22 separate statutory provision permits courts to impose most of the conditions listed in § 3563(b) in the context of supervised release, see 18 U.”
United States v. Novenda L. Cook, 890 F.2d 672 (4th Cir. 1989).
· cites it 4× “The district court rejected Cook’s contention that she was entitled to consideration for probation, concluding that Cook’s offense was a Class B felony at the time of the offense and thus pursuant to 18 U.S.C.A. § 3561 (a) (West Supp.1989) she *674 was not entitled to be…”
United States v. Prows, 448 F.3d 1223 (10th Cir. 2006).
· cites it 2× “The government raises three arguments on its appeal: (1) the suspended execution of Mr. Prows’ sentence is contrary to law because the 1984 Sentencing Reform Act repealed the prior statutory authority to suspend sentences; (2) Mr.”
United States v. Weikert, 504 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2007).
· cites it 2× “18 U.S.C. §§ 3561 , 3563. Supervised release, by contrast, is a period of community supervision imposed by the court to be completed after release from a jail or prison sentence, 18 U.”
United States v. Wilkinson, 590 F.3d 259 (4th Cir. 2010).
· cites it 2× “Additionally, the PSR stated that, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3561 (c)(1), Wilkinson was eligible for not less than 1 nor more than 5 years' probation.”
United States v. Stephen Remy Mueller, 463 F.3d 887 (9th Cir. 2006).
· cites it 4× “The question presented in this case is whether the district court is authorized to order probation under the probation stat *888 ute, 18 U.S.C. § 3561 , for a defendant convicted of receiving child pornography in violation of 18 U.”
United States v. Marjorie J. Jacobs, 919 F.2d 10 (3rd Cir. 1990).
· cites it 4× “1990) that came into effect after the defendant, Marjorie Jacobs committed the offense from rendering her eligible for probation under 18 U.S.C. § 3561 (1985 & Supp.1990). Applying the Supreme Court’s reasoning in Warden, Lewisburg Penitentiary v.”
United States v. Martin, 363 F.3d 25 (1st Cir. 2004).
· cites it 2× “18 U.S.C. § 3561 governs imposition of probation pursuant to the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984.”
— 18 U.S.C. § 3561(b) — 1 case
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.