Tuesday, February 24, 2015

Eighth Circuit: United States v. Gilberto Lara-Ruiz

Judgment citing incorrect statute, later corrected  didn't mean that deft was sentenced under wrong statute, as judge cited correct statute's mandatory minimum at sentencing.

Deft's attorney's concession in opening that deft committed a predicate offense is sufficient for proof of the predicate, given fact that deft didn't timely challenge.

Within-guidelines sentence not substantively unreasonable.

United States  v.  Gilberto Lara-Ruiz
Compiled by D.E. Frydrychowski, who is, not incidentally, not giving you legal advice.

Category tags above are sporadically maintained Do not rely. Do not rely. Do not rely.

Author's SSRN page here.