Legal Opinion
United States v. Santonio Parker
Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
Decided August 11, 2014No. 13-1592, 13-1714PublishedCited by 32 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RILEY, Chief Judge.
More than four years have passed since King v. United States, 595 F.3d 844, 849-52 (8th Cir.2010), noted a problematic ambiguity in the career offender provision of the United States Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.S.G. or Guidelines) § 4B1.2(c). The Sentencing Commission has taken no action to resolve the ambiguity, so once again we face an unsavory choice between two imperfect interpretations of this Guidelines provision. On the one hand, the government’s interpretation — which makes the most policy sense — would require us to ignore the rule of lenity and a fair reading of…
2Cases cited32 opinions
- United States v. BookerSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Gall v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
- Koon v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Nix v. WilliamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Kimbrough v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2007
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by32 opinions
- Raphael Donnell v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2014
- United States v. Sean MeadowsCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017
- United States v. Rodriguez-RosadoCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 2018
- United States v. Leobardo Hernandez-MarfilCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2016
- United States v. Quentin TidwellCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2016
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.