Skip navigation

U.S. v. Paul, No. 08-30125 (9th Cir.) (583 F.3d 1136) (September 30, 2009) (Per Curiam)

Here the Court declined to reconsider en banc an earlier decision which held that a within-Guidelines sentence was substantively unreasonable - over the dissent of five judges who were concerned about the precedential impact of that ruling.

In an unpublished decision in U.S. v. Paul, 239 Fed. Appx. 353 (9th …

 

Full article and associated cases available to subscribers.

As a digital subscriber to Punch and Jurists, you can access full text and downloads for this and other premium content.

Subscribe today

Already a subscriber? Login