Legal Opinion

United States v. Medley

Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit

Decided February 9, 2007No. 05-2383PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HARTZ, Circuit Judge.

Pamela Medley complains that the 97-month sentence imposed after our remand for resentencing is harsher than the original 78-month sentence that she appealed. On both occasions the district court sentenced her within the sentencing range computed under the United States Sentencing Guidelines. The first sentence was at the top of the range; the second sentence was at the bottom. The increase in her Guidelines sentencing range resulted from two changes. First, at the sentencing on remand the court used the 2000 version of the Guidelines rather than the 2001 version used at…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  3. North Carolina v. PearceSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  4. Alabama v. SmithSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Wasman v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1984

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. United States v. McBrideCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2011
  2. Eldridge v. BerkebileCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2015
  3. Stratmoen v. WardCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2007
  4. CGB Occupational Therapy, Inc. v. RHA Health Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007
  5. CGB Occupational Therapy, Inc. v. RHA Health Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2007

2 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