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In an unpublished decision in U.S. v. Paul, 239 Fed.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