Legal Opinion

United States v. Julilath Kouangvan

Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Decided January 4, 2017No. 15-3784PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RILEY, Chief Judge.

Julilath Kouangvan claims the length of her prison sentence was influenced by race or national origin (both hers and the victims’), the fact she immigrated to the United. States, and her anticipated inability to afford to pay restitution—or at least that someone observing her sentencing hearing could have gotten that impression. We detect no reliance on forbidden considerations in the district court’s 1 explanation of Kouangvan’s sentence, nor any encouragement of such reliance in the government’s'position at sentencing. With appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291,…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. United States v. FeemsterCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2009
  2. United States v. Louis F. PiraniCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2005
  3. United States v. Lai-Moi Leung and Seow Ming ChoonCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1994
  4. United States v. BurnetteCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
  5. United States v. Peter Onwuemene, A/K/A Joseph O. AmosCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1991

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. United States v. Dylan StoneCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017
  2. United States v. Robert HillCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2022
  3. United States v. Angelica AgenaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2025
  4. United States v. Joshua BaetenCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API