Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

United States v. Burns

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided August 27, 2007No. 04-2901, 04-2933Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partBye, Circuit Judge

The majority holds the district court’s sixty percent downward departure was excessive and unreasonable under the circumstances presented by this case. Because the district court appropriately exercised its sentencing discretion, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision to vacate the sentence and remand for resentencing. I join the majority’s opinion in other respects. I also join in Judge Bright’s dissent.

I

We review the extent of a substantial assistance downward departure for an abuse of discretion. United States v. Coyle, 429 F.3d 1192, 1193 (8th Cir.2005). “[Tjhere is no bright…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. United States v. Darrin Todd HaackCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2005
  2. United States v. Deborah Marie DaltonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2005
  3. United States v. Kim Darby SaenzCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2005
  4. United States v. Jose PizanoCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2005
  5. United States v. Mathew Meyer, Also Known as Mathew SalemCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2006

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API